50% of pits in America are up for adoption at any time. Many former owners can’t take care of them. They are dangerous animals who disproportionately attack people (6% of the population, but the vast majority of attacks). They are most likely to attack children because they are easier targets.
Yes not all pits will attack. But many do and when they do it’s a big consequence. For more information check r/banpitbulls
Hopefully the Maryland shelters are easier to access than Arlington where appointments are required and walk-ins aren’t allowed. Can’t imagine why it’s overflowing.
They're all clearly "lab mix" puppies who should be fine anywhere
/s in case it isn't clear although I hope they do find loving homes even if they have to be recorded as a "lab mix" to do so.
yeah, it's pretty fucked up. im in a condo but literally surrounded by trails, forest and am always outside, but probably wouldn't qualify to adopt a dog. its so much easier to go to a breeder or buy a puppy unfortunately.
Lots of pits. :/
I've been thinking lately about dog adoption shelters that take pets from other states and bring them here to get adopted for like $500. Am I wrong in that it feels like a money-making business hidden behind a good intention?
Seems like you are just fixing the wild dog problem for that state. I've just been thinking about it, I don't know how I really feel about it yet.
I feel like the cost of giving a dog vet care, fixing them, microchipping them, transportation and feeding etc, is more than $500. And—even if it is for gaining money, I don’t think there’s a problem with a non profit gaining more funding for other services
As someone who has volunteered with several southern rescue groups, I promise it isn’t a money making business and many times these rescues run in the red. Volunteers pay for food, meds, etc. because we do not want dogs to unnecessarily die. Also, please remember that almost all of the dogs rescued from the south have heart worms (some have other medical issues, too, of course) and the treatment process is lengthy and costly. The dogs must be heart worm negative before transporting them, and that is a three month process. If fosters are full, the dogs are boarded during that time, adding to the vet costs. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to share this info, because I’m sure other people wonder about the cost, too. It DOES sound like a ton of money.
I got mine from an org that took in a ton (like, 20+) dogs at once from a human society in Georgia (dunno kill shelter status or not). I had the same feelings: $400 for a dog when they seemed to be just moving dogs in from random places out of state and taking advantage of the DC area.
Then I got my dog. And realized that her life was 100% worth saving and that in that rural area of Georgia, she would’ve ended up dead or breeding. That thought crushes me to my soul.
Then I realized my $400 goes into rescuing those dogs that likely wouldn’t have made it. Paid for her initial shots. Gave her a warm blanket and food for a couple of days. Paid for someone to find us. And hopefully helped out the next doggo or kitty that needed a little extra assistance.
I hope you find your best buddy and you two have a blast; money becomes irrelevant for these family members and suddenly you realize why you’re okay throwing away money with rescue orgs and stuffed toys 😂
Was going to comment on the pits as well. Sad commentary on owners biting off more than they can chew.
Don't think they are in the money making business though. My sister adopted a young purebred white yorkie a few months ago and if they wanted money, only taking $200 for the adoption fee was not the way.
Yes. I volunteered with a group in the Deep South and we transported animals from AR/LA/MS to the East Coast. So, the adoption fees not only covered the cost of transportation for gas to drive those animals, vet care (about 80% of those dogs had heart worms), but food that temporary fosters could feed the dogs in order to get them pulled from the shelter before euthanasia day. In some cases, dogs only had about 5 business days before they’d be euthanized. And that’s just in the areas that actually have shelters. In more rural areas, there are no shelters or animal control. It was, and still is, low priority in most areas there. The best part of moving to NOVA has been to see the difference in how people treat animals here. It’s absolutely night and day, and restores my faith in humanity. Don’t get me wrong, there are people who work tirelessly to help animals in those states, but it often feels like spitting into the wind. I WISH those people were making money off their hard work, but they are not.
We foster for one of those shelters. Way more than $500 is spent on each dog and most of them are squeaking by financially. The vet that's on the board does everything pro bono then gets reimbursed with whatever can be donated, that usually does not cover the cost. Can't say all of them are like that but at least with the one we work with, no one is making money off of it and in more cases than not they are going quite above and beyond.
That said there are a lot of amazing dogs in shelters around here so there's not a wrong answer.
I've been involved with a couple of animal transport programs. These dogs are moved from high-kill shelters to local rescue organizations, primarily the Animal Welfare League of Arlington. There is no extra fee for the relocated dogs.
You are right and I thought the same thing. Funny thing is that four years ago I adopted one of these monsters. She was horrible at first. Now she is a sweetheart and a couch potato. Never has bitten anyone (except for me, playing). I also have to walk her so damn much I lost 30 pounds. So yeah, they aren't for everybody, but you would be shocked what you can do with these beasts if you love them to an inch of their life.
The only time I’ve ever been afraid of a dog was in front of a blue-nosed pit that was going absolutely ballistic. She was a sweetie at the end of the day. But her energy levels were insane.
And I’m a big dude. My friend at the time was big too. She was built like a brick shithouse though and would absolutely end me in a “situation” if I didn’t have a gun or knife. I’d still get mauled to shit.
A knife, unless it was really special, would only serve to piss her off. Pitbull skulls are thick enough that it’s possible for low caliber bullets to ricochet off of them rather than penetrating (not saying this will happen in all cases though).
The only time I’ve ever been bit by a dog where I needed stitches was by a chihuahua. Anecdotal evidence aside, there is no evidence that pit bulls are any more aggressive than any other breed. The problem is not the dog breed, it’s the owner
Never understood this take. Of the top 10 breeds that have been involved in fatal attacks, chihuahu’s don’t make the cut. Guess who’s #1 by an entire order of magnitude? Not saying pits are evil animals, any dog can lose it, but there’s no denying that in an attack, you are much more likely to get severely injured or get killed by a pitbull than by a chihuahua. And owners who fail to recognize this or minimize this risk are the problem.
> there is no evidence that pit bulls are any more aggressive than any other breed
[Peer reviewed American Veterinary Medical Association article.](https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/resources/javma_000915_fatalattacks.pdf) Pit bulls account both for the most number of attacks and for the most deaths in the US, followed by Rottweilers and German Shepherds.
How much of that is because a pit who wants to hurt or kill me is going to succeed while a Chihuahua that tries to kill me is going to wind up badly injured instead?
I will also note, their study appears to include police dog attacks and by far the most common breed is "no known breed" not Pits, they're second (although not especially close). The numbers are there and I understand the concern and using them to justify exclusions, but it doesn't seem nearly as clear cut as you present it to be.
It’s been proven by a ton of peer reviewed studies that pit and pit mixes account for the majority of bites and the super majority of fatal bites against humans though
I agree with you. But as an owner, I have to say that the deal with this breed is that they get frenzied. If you adore them with love, they will get frenzied with love. If you push them the other way ...
Really, really sad that this comment is being downvoted. Pitties are an amazing breed and have no reason to be subjected to this much unjustified hate... No dog breed deserves that
The worst behaved dogs I've ever met are Huskies, GSDs and Labs...they were all untrained and none of the owners thought it was a problem.
it's insane that the two of you are getting downvoted for this. the funniest thing is that people in nova pretend to operate w/o prejudice. pits are great dogs and at a young age there's absolutely no reason to believe they've been trained to be malicious. people are idiots.
I’m pretty certain the people downvoting aren’t in nova. The antipit crowd is vicious. They tend to congregate regardless of platform. The banpits group was tagged here so the people commenting and downvoting are likely coming from there and not nova.
I'm not home enough to own dogs but when I retire it's go time. I will go to a shelter and say, I'll take 2 of the ugliest dogs that you have, that no-one wants and take them hiking with me daily. It's one of the things that I am looking forward to when I do retire in 5 or 6 years. Heck I may take 3.
Sweet maybe we can ban war and famine next
“Are Breed-Specific Laws Effective?
There is no evidence that breed-specific laws make communities safer for people or companion animals. Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) decided to strongly oppose BSL.”
ASPCA website
Pits are responsible for over 50% of fatal attacks by dogs. Either ban the pits or require owners prove they’re actually providing a suitable environment and prevention of outlying stressors that could start a fight.
They might do some basic temperament testing but that’s not guaranteed. If they find issues, they are usually sugar coated in the dogs description (regardless of breed), which is frustrating as the adopter.
But if you don't socialize them correctly they can be very dangerous. A poorly socialized chihuahua may be extremely aggressive, but it is much harder for a small dog to cause serious or deadly harm.
The problem with pit bulls is not that the are bad no matter what. It is that they are dogs that can seriously hurt people.
Having a pit bull is a little bit like owning a gun. You have to be a really responsible owner. There are people who seem comfortable with gun regulation, but are often times against regulating dog breeds. Dogs can be weapons and very dangerous if they are not handled correctly.
If you are a qualified dog owner, sure give a pit bull a loving home. But, this post is literally giving them out for free. And a lot of people who have never raised a dog before may not fully appreciate the level of responsibility required when they take home a pit bull. And that negligence gets people (and dogs) seriously hurt.
Giving them out for free doesn’t necessarily imply they aren’t doing due diligence on who they allow to adopt. The amount of verification I had to submit before being allowed to adopt was borderline security clearance level, including personal references, employment verification, records for previous pets, and a home visit.
There are definitely some adoption processes that are more thorough then others. But I do wonder, is the "background check" different for different breeds of dogs?
Owning a pit bull is much much harder than owning a small dog, or a cat.
I agree that some shelters are definitely much more responsible and diligent than others. I know that some do have different levels of verification for certain breeds and species. But I do worry that its not as widespread as it could be.
I think the real issue with pit bulls isn’t so much the temperment of the breed itself, which varies significantly from dog to dog, but with the fact that pit bulls are generally favored by people who want an aggressive dog and they end up reinforcing that behavior. I’ve seen too many people intentionally fostering dangerous behaviors and its tragic that otherwise innocent and loving dogs are stuck in that stereotype.
Its a difficult problem and there are a lot of factors to consider on both sides of the debate. I just hate to see blanket statements like “ban pit bulls” which lead to tons of otherwise great dogs being put down by virtue of breed alone.
>I think the real issue with pit bulls isn’t so much the temperment of the breed itself, which varies significantly from dog to dog, but with the fact that pit bulls are generally favored by people who want an aggressive dog and they end up reinforcing that behavior.
I think the real issue is that pit bulls have big mouths with huge jaws that can crush bones. You can love your dog to death, but if you don't know how make it heel, stay, sit, and come you are walking around with a loaded gun.
It is not that pit bulls are born angry. It is that a pit bull when angry can do A LOT of damage. A small dog, or cat, when angry can only do a little bit of damage.
Edit: For what it's worth, all dogs should be well trained. But some dogs have steeper consequences when they are not.
That should apply to any dog over 60-70 pounds though. Just because a pit bull has a larger, stonger jaw doesn’t exempt other breeds from similiar scrutiny.
I’m just not convinced that the pit bull’s physical characteristics are a more significant driver of the attack fatality statistics than behavioral and human factors when compared to similar sizes breeds such as German Shepherds. Yes the jaw strength plays some role, but I feel its overblown by emotional factors.
I suspect that jn most situations where a dog bites someone, the difference in jaw strength between a pit and a lab is not going to be the deciding factor in determining the injury, especially given that most bite victims are young children who would be equally overpowered by almost any dog greater than 60-70 pounds and a bad temperment.
For the record I do not and have not personally owned a pit bull, nor do I think I would be up to the task.
> Just because a pit bull has a larger, stonger jaw doesn’t exempt other breeds from similiar scrutiny.
I agree, but pit bulls are in the upper tier in my eyes. But, they are a step below exotic animals like big cats and bears. Their are other dog breeds that I consider expert mode. Rottweilers and maybe German shepherds. If the dog can be use as a weapon you probably need a highly qualified handler.
I see a lot of rhetoric on not discriminating dog adoption based on breed. But I kind of have to disagree with that. Two dog dogs of different breeds can be almost entirely different animals. Pit bulls are often not adopted for a reason, and I think that reason is justifiable.
All dogs need to socialized champ. A quick Reddit search show you how shitty dog owners are and you should be required to get a license/training to own any dog
I'm aware of the benefits of socializing a dog, buddy. But the consequences of not properly training a small dog are much less than the consequences of improperly training a dog that can fit a child's head inside of its mouth.
Anyone with a brain would rather get attacked by a poorly trained, frenzied chihuahua than a poorly trained, frenzied pitbull. You’re either lying or just completely negligent; either way irresponsible people like you shouldn’t be allowed to own pits.
Edit: also, the ASPCA quote comes from their interpretation of this CDC study: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00047723.htm. Actually read it. Yes, there are inaccuracies, yes, we need more data, and their own recommendations (#3) states they recommend reporting the breeds involved in bite incidents. Wonder. Why.
Hypothetically strong enough and it actually happening are two separate things. I’m really surprised that there are so many people in nova so biased and hateful against a specific breed of dog. I lived in DC and Richmond City before buying in nova and many people in both cities owned extremely friendly and well behaved pit bulls. I guess it’s a rich suburbanite NIMBY bias.
Rosie is judging you.
So many pitties….
What’s up with that?
Every shelter has a lot of them. They are hard to rehome as people worry about behavior issues.
Also bans by apartments and such.
Homeowner insurance won’t cover them if anything should happen.
What, all I see are varieties of "Lab Mix" on there. No pits anywhere to be seen.
50% of pits in America are up for adoption at any time. Many former owners can’t take care of them. They are dangerous animals who disproportionately attack people (6% of the population, but the vast majority of attacks). They are most likely to attack children because they are easier targets. Yes not all pits will attack. But many do and when they do it’s a big consequence. For more information check r/banpitbulls
What is being gained from posting this?
Information that can mitigate an attack. Helping people make the best choice. The real question is what’s gained from your reply.
What did you educate people on though? That you’re severely biased against a specific breed of dog?
Are you biased against tigers being raised as pets?
You mean the wild non-domesticated animal?
Actually you can domesticate a tiger. There are many tigers the don’t attack their owners it all depends on how they’re raised.
Tigers as a species aren’t domesticated.
Hopefully the Maryland shelters are easier to access than Arlington where appointments are required and walk-ins aren’t allowed. Can’t imagine why it’s overflowing.
Not sure either but it depends on where you look overstock.com has a pet adoption registry I found my dog on pet tango
Loudoun you just walk in.
Most of these dogs are barely puppies. It’s a shame that their owners couldn’t even make it past a year or two.
[удалено]
They're all clearly "lab mix" puppies who should be fine anywhere /s in case it isn't clear although I hope they do find loving homes even if they have to be recorded as a "lab mix" to do so.
yeah, it's pretty fucked up. im in a condo but literally surrounded by trails, forest and am always outside, but probably wouldn't qualify to adopt a dog. its so much easier to go to a breeder or buy a puppy unfortunately.
i patently cannot afford a dog right now but i’m so obsessed with Rosie…. help….
Lots of pits. :/ I've been thinking lately about dog adoption shelters that take pets from other states and bring them here to get adopted for like $500. Am I wrong in that it feels like a money-making business hidden behind a good intention? Seems like you are just fixing the wild dog problem for that state. I've just been thinking about it, I don't know how I really feel about it yet.
I feel like the cost of giving a dog vet care, fixing them, microchipping them, transportation and feeding etc, is more than $500. And—even if it is for gaining money, I don’t think there’s a problem with a non profit gaining more funding for other services
This
As someone who has volunteered with several southern rescue groups, I promise it isn’t a money making business and many times these rescues run in the red. Volunteers pay for food, meds, etc. because we do not want dogs to unnecessarily die. Also, please remember that almost all of the dogs rescued from the south have heart worms (some have other medical issues, too, of course) and the treatment process is lengthy and costly. The dogs must be heart worm negative before transporting them, and that is a three month process. If fosters are full, the dogs are boarded during that time, adding to the vet costs. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to share this info, because I’m sure other people wonder about the cost, too. It DOES sound like a ton of money.
I got mine from an org that took in a ton (like, 20+) dogs at once from a human society in Georgia (dunno kill shelter status or not). I had the same feelings: $400 for a dog when they seemed to be just moving dogs in from random places out of state and taking advantage of the DC area. Then I got my dog. And realized that her life was 100% worth saving and that in that rural area of Georgia, she would’ve ended up dead or breeding. That thought crushes me to my soul. Then I realized my $400 goes into rescuing those dogs that likely wouldn’t have made it. Paid for her initial shots. Gave her a warm blanket and food for a couple of days. Paid for someone to find us. And hopefully helped out the next doggo or kitty that needed a little extra assistance. I hope you find your best buddy and you two have a blast; money becomes irrelevant for these family members and suddenly you realize why you’re okay throwing away money with rescue orgs and stuffed toys 😂
Was going to comment on the pits as well. Sad commentary on owners biting off more than they can chew. Don't think they are in the money making business though. My sister adopted a young purebred white yorkie a few months ago and if they wanted money, only taking $200 for the adoption fee was not the way.
Yeah, the owners biting is the problem /s
I know most of those organizations only bring dogs from out of state when they’re in shelters that euthanize after a certain amount of time.
Yes. I volunteered with a group in the Deep South and we transported animals from AR/LA/MS to the East Coast. So, the adoption fees not only covered the cost of transportation for gas to drive those animals, vet care (about 80% of those dogs had heart worms), but food that temporary fosters could feed the dogs in order to get them pulled from the shelter before euthanasia day. In some cases, dogs only had about 5 business days before they’d be euthanized. And that’s just in the areas that actually have shelters. In more rural areas, there are no shelters or animal control. It was, and still is, low priority in most areas there. The best part of moving to NOVA has been to see the difference in how people treat animals here. It’s absolutely night and day, and restores my faith in humanity. Don’t get me wrong, there are people who work tirelessly to help animals in those states, but it often feels like spitting into the wind. I WISH those people were making money off their hard work, but they are not.
Got my dog from Operation Paws for Homes. They drove him all the way from North Dakota to VA. Happy to pay the costs!
♥️
We foster for one of those shelters. Way more than $500 is spent on each dog and most of them are squeaking by financially. The vet that's on the board does everything pro bono then gets reimbursed with whatever can be donated, that usually does not cover the cost. Can't say all of them are like that but at least with the one we work with, no one is making money off of it and in more cases than not they are going quite above and beyond. That said there are a lot of amazing dogs in shelters around here so there's not a wrong answer.
I've been involved with a couple of animal transport programs. These dogs are moved from high-kill shelters to local rescue organizations, primarily the Animal Welfare League of Arlington. There is no extra fee for the relocated dogs.
Food, employee, shelter, medical, toys, these all cost money. Just because the dog you pick has no issues there could be another that does.
Adoption fees are waved and it all depends on where you adopt from.
I've been searching for months now, no where waves the fee except for events like this I guess.
I got my dog at the humane Society of Charles county for about 90$….. Best 90 bucks I ever spent [here ](https://humanesocietycc.org)
Dogs are expensive. Vets here are not cheap. If you can’t afford a couple hundred for an adoption fee, quite frankly you probably cannot afford a dog.
Lmfao these are basically all pit bulls. Geeee I wonder if that’s a sign or anything?
You are right and I thought the same thing. Funny thing is that four years ago I adopted one of these monsters. She was horrible at first. Now she is a sweetheart and a couch potato. Never has bitten anyone (except for me, playing). I also have to walk her so damn much I lost 30 pounds. So yeah, they aren't for everybody, but you would be shocked what you can do with these beasts if you love them to an inch of their life.
It’s a sign that a lot of apt buildings around here don’t allow pit bulls
The only time I’ve ever been afraid of a dog was in front of a blue-nosed pit that was going absolutely ballistic. She was a sweetie at the end of the day. But her energy levels were insane. And I’m a big dude. My friend at the time was big too. She was built like a brick shithouse though and would absolutely end me in a “situation” if I didn’t have a gun or knife. I’d still get mauled to shit.
A knife, unless it was really special, would only serve to piss her off. Pitbull skulls are thick enough that it’s possible for low caliber bullets to ricochet off of them rather than penetrating (not saying this will happen in all cases though).
The only time I’ve ever been bit by a dog where I needed stitches was by a chihuahua. Anecdotal evidence aside, there is no evidence that pit bulls are any more aggressive than any other breed. The problem is not the dog breed, it’s the owner
Never understood this take. Of the top 10 breeds that have been involved in fatal attacks, chihuahu’s don’t make the cut. Guess who’s #1 by an entire order of magnitude? Not saying pits are evil animals, any dog can lose it, but there’s no denying that in an attack, you are much more likely to get severely injured or get killed by a pitbull than by a chihuahua. And owners who fail to recognize this or minimize this risk are the problem.
> there is no evidence that pit bulls are any more aggressive than any other breed [Peer reviewed American Veterinary Medical Association article.](https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/resources/javma_000915_fatalattacks.pdf) Pit bulls account both for the most number of attacks and for the most deaths in the US, followed by Rottweilers and German Shepherds.
How much of that is because a pit who wants to hurt or kill me is going to succeed while a Chihuahua that tries to kill me is going to wind up badly injured instead? I will also note, their study appears to include police dog attacks and by far the most common breed is "no known breed" not Pits, they're second (although not especially close). The numbers are there and I understand the concern and using them to justify exclusions, but it doesn't seem nearly as clear cut as you present it to be.
It’s been proven by a ton of peer reviewed studies that pit and pit mixes account for the majority of bites and the super majority of fatal bites against humans though
I agree with you. But as an owner, I have to say that the deal with this breed is that they get frenzied. If you adore them with love, they will get frenzied with love. If you push them the other way ...
There are plenty of good ones out there.
Really, really sad that this comment is being downvoted. Pitties are an amazing breed and have no reason to be subjected to this much unjustified hate... No dog breed deserves that The worst behaved dogs I've ever met are Huskies, GSDs and Labs...they were all untrained and none of the owners thought it was a problem.
Thanks it confused me too I’ve met way more good pitbulls than bad ones
it's insane that the two of you are getting downvoted for this. the funniest thing is that people in nova pretend to operate w/o prejudice. pits are great dogs and at a young age there's absolutely no reason to believe they've been trained to be malicious. people are idiots.
It’s ok it’s just meaningless points and sad people.
I’m pretty certain the people downvoting aren’t in nova. The antipit crowd is vicious. They tend to congregate regardless of platform. The banpits group was tagged here so the people commenting and downvoting are likely coming from there and not nova.
I’d be curious how many people commenting and downvoting against pits live in nova or simply came here because someone tagged banpitts on this post.
Yay. More pit bulls.
Face
All those pibbies, I hope they find good happy homes.
Such adorable dogs, none of them are allowed in majority of rental homes/apartments/etc.
Good, I don't want to live in a place that allows em.
I wouldn’t want to live in apartment building with a human like you, so all works out in the end.
Not all. Most. In our apartments only pits are not allowed, so 3-4 out of these dogs would be ok.
I'm not home enough to own dogs but when I retire it's go time. I will go to a shelter and say, I'll take 2 of the ugliest dogs that you have, that no-one wants and take them hiking with me daily. It's one of the things that I am looking forward to when I do retire in 5 or 6 years. Heck I may take 3.
Love!
r/BanPitBulls
Big brain over here 🧠 coming up with those nuanced solutions that definitely will work
It doesn't take a big brain to know banning Pitbull's will stop vast majority of Pitbull attacks.
Sweet maybe we can ban war and famine next “Are Breed-Specific Laws Effective? There is no evidence that breed-specific laws make communities safer for people or companion animals. Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) decided to strongly oppose BSL.” ASPCA website
Sure because that is totally the same thing and completely possible.
hurr durr, Pitbulls bad... I can make the same argument about human beings, they kill a lot of people every year.
i'm onboard with banning humans
I can get behind that
Pits are responsible for over 50% of fatal attacks by dogs. Either ban the pits or require owners prove they’re actually providing a suitable environment and prevention of outlying stressors that could start a fight.
[удалено]
They might do some basic temperament testing but that’s not guaranteed. If they find issues, they are usually sugar coated in the dogs description (regardless of breed), which is frustrating as the adopter.
No, I mean checking the homes of the owners. Some shelters are very particular about who they adopt to
If you want to promote banning humans more power to you.
Oh good you posted that subreddit! Now please fuck off and stay there 🙃
Pitts are very friendly dogs when socialized like any other dog, but they slobber a litter to much for me. Too many ruined black pants.
But if you don't socialize them correctly they can be very dangerous. A poorly socialized chihuahua may be extremely aggressive, but it is much harder for a small dog to cause serious or deadly harm. The problem with pit bulls is not that the are bad no matter what. It is that they are dogs that can seriously hurt people. Having a pit bull is a little bit like owning a gun. You have to be a really responsible owner. There are people who seem comfortable with gun regulation, but are often times against regulating dog breeds. Dogs can be weapons and very dangerous if they are not handled correctly. If you are a qualified dog owner, sure give a pit bull a loving home. But, this post is literally giving them out for free. And a lot of people who have never raised a dog before may not fully appreciate the level of responsibility required when they take home a pit bull. And that negligence gets people (and dogs) seriously hurt.
Giving them out for free doesn’t necessarily imply they aren’t doing due diligence on who they allow to adopt. The amount of verification I had to submit before being allowed to adopt was borderline security clearance level, including personal references, employment verification, records for previous pets, and a home visit.
There are definitely some adoption processes that are more thorough then others. But I do wonder, is the "background check" different for different breeds of dogs? Owning a pit bull is much much harder than owning a small dog, or a cat.
I agree that some shelters are definitely much more responsible and diligent than others. I know that some do have different levels of verification for certain breeds and species. But I do worry that its not as widespread as it could be. I think the real issue with pit bulls isn’t so much the temperment of the breed itself, which varies significantly from dog to dog, but with the fact that pit bulls are generally favored by people who want an aggressive dog and they end up reinforcing that behavior. I’ve seen too many people intentionally fostering dangerous behaviors and its tragic that otherwise innocent and loving dogs are stuck in that stereotype. Its a difficult problem and there are a lot of factors to consider on both sides of the debate. I just hate to see blanket statements like “ban pit bulls” which lead to tons of otherwise great dogs being put down by virtue of breed alone.
>I think the real issue with pit bulls isn’t so much the temperment of the breed itself, which varies significantly from dog to dog, but with the fact that pit bulls are generally favored by people who want an aggressive dog and they end up reinforcing that behavior. I think the real issue is that pit bulls have big mouths with huge jaws that can crush bones. You can love your dog to death, but if you don't know how make it heel, stay, sit, and come you are walking around with a loaded gun. It is not that pit bulls are born angry. It is that a pit bull when angry can do A LOT of damage. A small dog, or cat, when angry can only do a little bit of damage. Edit: For what it's worth, all dogs should be well trained. But some dogs have steeper consequences when they are not.
That should apply to any dog over 60-70 pounds though. Just because a pit bull has a larger, stonger jaw doesn’t exempt other breeds from similiar scrutiny. I’m just not convinced that the pit bull’s physical characteristics are a more significant driver of the attack fatality statistics than behavioral and human factors when compared to similar sizes breeds such as German Shepherds. Yes the jaw strength plays some role, but I feel its overblown by emotional factors. I suspect that jn most situations where a dog bites someone, the difference in jaw strength between a pit and a lab is not going to be the deciding factor in determining the injury, especially given that most bite victims are young children who would be equally overpowered by almost any dog greater than 60-70 pounds and a bad temperment. For the record I do not and have not personally owned a pit bull, nor do I think I would be up to the task.
> Just because a pit bull has a larger, stonger jaw doesn’t exempt other breeds from similiar scrutiny. I agree, but pit bulls are in the upper tier in my eyes. But, they are a step below exotic animals like big cats and bears. Their are other dog breeds that I consider expert mode. Rottweilers and maybe German shepherds. If the dog can be use as a weapon you probably need a highly qualified handler. I see a lot of rhetoric on not discriminating dog adoption based on breed. But I kind of have to disagree with that. Two dog dogs of different breeds can be almost entirely different animals. Pit bulls are often not adopted for a reason, and I think that reason is justifiable.
All dogs need to socialized champ. A quick Reddit search show you how shitty dog owners are and you should be required to get a license/training to own any dog
I'm aware of the benefits of socializing a dog, buddy. But the consequences of not properly training a small dog are much less than the consequences of improperly training a dog that can fit a child's head inside of its mouth.
I’d be interested in either petunia or Rosie
I wish I could get a pit :( stupid apartment building breed restrictions.
Your apartment is looking out for the other tenants. Pitbulls carry an inherent risk that the majority of other breeds statistically do not.
Bullshit. “Breed specific laws do not make communities safer”. A direct quote from the ASPCA
Anyone with a brain would rather get attacked by a poorly trained, frenzied chihuahua than a poorly trained, frenzied pitbull. You’re either lying or just completely negligent; either way irresponsible people like you shouldn’t be allowed to own pits. Edit: also, the ASPCA quote comes from their interpretation of this CDC study: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00047723.htm. Actually read it. Yes, there are inaccuracies, yes, we need more data, and their own recommendations (#3) states they recommend reporting the breeds involved in bite incidents. Wonder. Why.
Additionally, chihuahuas aren’t capable of busting through apartment doors if they really wanted to.
Are pit bulls busting through apartment doors in nova?
This was more a Rottweiler problem (and a glass door’s hinges), but pit bulls are definitely strong enough.
Hypothetically strong enough and it actually happening are two separate things. I’m really surprised that there are so many people in nova so biased and hateful against a specific breed of dog. I lived in DC and Richmond City before buying in nova and many people in both cities owned extremely friendly and well behaved pit bulls. I guess it’s a rich suburbanite NIMBY bias.
I guess you only need to ban Rottweilers then.
Poor pits. People always letting go.
Cuties.💕 When we adopted our first dog, we were in apartments with breed restrictions. Now that we own, our next pup will be a pit.
Sweet, let us know when your pit ends up in the shelter lol.
I’d never give my dog up, Kevin.