There are so many problems with your comment.

I dont follow your logic here. You seem annoyed at attitudes that focus on the particular breed, and seem to consider breed-specific legislation as anathema, but then lay out a pretty convincing case that these breeds should only be in the care of well-trained, highly responsible individuals (such as yourself). And that, failing such standards of care and supervision, the dogs are, in fact, dangerous.

As YAJ has already pointed out most of the recommendations follow for any dog, especially large breed dogs. Dogs are social creatures that will live in a hierarchy, as such the human owners need to socialize their dog and provide the heirarchical structure. Failing in the latter the dog will do its best (which is never good since it is only a dog living with humans in a human world) to establish the hierarchy with itself at the top.

Well, we dont have doggy-owner liscensing regulations, and I suspect you would oppose that. And given the general level of irresponsibility in the population at large, then banning such breeds seems rather reasonable. Its not like there arent dozens of other breeds that people can own.

There you go again making assumptions about what I think. No, showing that you understand the special issues with owning a bully breed and any large powerful breed would probably be a good idea. This goes for rottweilers, akitas, german shephards, labradors, dobermans, dogo argentina, presa canarios, etc.

Also, cars are very dangerous items and kill far more people than dogs do every year, same with booze when combined with cars. Should we ban those? By your reasoning the answer is an unequivocal yes. And yes, there are dozens of other breeds that irresponsible owners can own that are if anything possibly more dangerous. Rottweilers and presa canarios never had any breeding to reduce human aggression. Would you be happier with a 130 pound rott or 110 pound presa next door to you, or the well breed, well socialized American Pit Bull Terrier?

Lets be real here. These are not “natural” animals. They have been artificially selected for certain traits. It is rather disingenuous to absolve the breed and just blame the irresponsible owners.

No, but 'we', as in us humans, created them. They are a product of what we wanted the dogs had no say in it. To ban them (i.e. euthanize all of them) is simply grotesque and highlights the hubris and despicable nature of mankind, IMO. When we create something we feel we can no longer control we destroy it. Is that what you are saying?

What it amounts to saying is that with proper, insightful, skilled training, care and discipline, these dogs can be controlled.

This is true for any and all dogs, but given the bad rap the American Pit Bull Terrier has gotten it is even more true. The people who appreciate this breed need to take extra steps to demonstarte to the ignorant, such as yourself, that these dogs are not inherently any more dangerous than any other dog.

Well, for animals that are going to live in a society teeming with children and other animals, it shouldnt take such attentive training, care and discipline in order prevent disasters happening. Who nees this crap? And what is the great attraction of owning a “bully” pet anyway?

As ravin has already noted, they make great family pets. The stories like the one with Missy is not isolated. There are dozens more out there that I have found, and probably more that I haven't. As for your complaint, why aren't you arguing to get rid of cars, handguns, and drugs? They are far, far more deadly and far, far more likely to kill children than a responsibly breed and socialized dog, be it a APBT or another large breed dog.

ask SIEGFREID & ROY about the safety of well trained animals. you know what they say; “YOU CAN’T FOOL MOTHER NATURE”. i know how to safely run my chainsaw, but i won’t run it around children or unprotected adults.

Floyd, are you really this stupid? The domesticated dog is not a wild animal. The domesticated dog is not as large and powerful as a full grown tiger. As for your chainsaw analogy, your are quite right, which is why the responsible dog owner should take similar precautions. Banning dogs would be like throwing out your chainsaw. As I said, stupid.

So, why don't you trot on out the garage and toss that evil vicious chainsaw in the garbage...oh and disable it first so some other unsuspecting fool does not run afoul of it.

As an aside, when I was a very young child (younger than the boy who was attacked), we had a dachshund and a cat (Siamese). They were purchased as pup and kitten, so grew up together. If one was lying down, the other would likely go lie down next to/on them. The dachshund had a habit of picking fights with neighbor dogs. The fights were very predictable with the dachshund being in a ball, held by the scruff of the neck by the other dog and being shaken within a minute of the fight starting. He just wasn't much of a fighter. But the fight usually ended before the second minute. The cat would hear the commotion, and come running. While the dog the dachshund attack was concentrating on shaking the dachshund, the cat would jump on its head, bite the dogs ear, dig in with the front paws and start scratching the eyes out of the dog doing the shaking. The sudden change in what was going on would inevitably make the dog open their mouth to drop the dachshund, and concentrate on getting rid of the cat. The dachshund would run off home to be doctored up, the dog who had been doing the shaking would usually be glad to run off when the cat jumped off, or at worse would get frustrated when the cat ran up a tree and pretended it had no idea why there was a dog with a bloody face barking at the base of the tree.

So we had to keep our dachshund inside or on a leash to protect the neighborhood dogs. Not because the dachshund was a threat, but because the cat would very effectively end any fight the dachshund started.

No purebred dog is a 'natural' animal, they are all bred for certain qualities. Tano, you make it seem like you need a PhD in dogs to own this breed and control it, which isn't true. You just need to put a little time and effort into it, which you should do with any dog. Any dog will have behavior problems if you don't put at least some effort into training it and socializing it.

I'm not saying that you won't find the occasional 'bad dog', cuz you will. And you should always take a breed's personality into account before you bring one into your life. (A lot of people get active dogs that they can't handle and end up having to get rid of them.) But most dogs are trainable.

I think some of the reasons for owning a bully dog are that people just like the way the dog looks, much like some people like, say, the way poodles look, or that regardless of their behavior, they LOOK like watchdogs, which deters intruders. Kind of like a husky looks intimidating, even though it's more likely to run up with a wagging tail than to chase someone off. Personally, I like border collies. I couldn't tell you exactly why I like border collies, as opposed to dogs with similar qualities, much like I can't tell you exactly why I like mint chocolate chip ice cream more than rocky road.

She also travels to the homes of other friends, who have other dogs. She knows them all, and they all get along very well together. She sometimes stays with the other dogs to keep her busy when her owners are on vacation.

Based on this, and on the aggressive dogs I've seen relative to their owners, I'm going to agree that training and socialization mean a LOT more than breed. Every aggressive dog I've known has either been trained to be that way out of some misguided notion of what a watchdog is, or basic training has been neglected and the dog never learned proper behavior.

Floyd, both entertainers knew the dangers of the animals. Based on later reports, the tiger was trying to HELP at the time of the accident, by dragging him to safety, away from the crowd, after he had a heart attack on stage. All animals are animals, and accidents can happen. So care should always be taken. But an animal's personality and behavior have a lot to do with how it's raised and treated.

Well, we dont have doggy-owner liscensing regulations, and I suspect you would oppose that. And given the general level of irresponsibility in the population at large, then banning such breeds seems rather reasonable. Its not like there arent dozens of other breeds that people can own.

Lets be real here. These are not "natural" animals. They have been artificially selected for certain traits. It is rather disingenuous to absolve the breed and just blame the irresponsible owners. What it amounts to saying is that with proper, insightful, skilled training, care and discipline, these dogs can be controlled. Well, for animals that are going to live in a society teeming with children and other animals, it shouldnt take such attentive training, care and discipline in order prevent disasters happening. Who nees this crap? And what is the great attraction of owning a "bully" pet anyway?

My brother in law has a couple of bull type dogs-they aren't pit bulls, but some other bulldog, and they are mostly big old babies. I have never seen them aggressive around kids-I haven't seen them around other dogs, so can't speak to that.