OT Another Pit Bull Attack! - Page 4

Ugly no problems between us . Hell we have heart, Most dont, and care about nothing. Take care .

Regarding the APBT, the pedigree is more important than with any other breed.  Someone knowledgable with the breed, can just about tell anything from a dog's pedigree if it goes back a ways. 

Proud Shepherd Poppa, your last reply shows you have no knowledge what so ever about the APBT.  There are most definitely bloodlines in the APBT breed and where certain dogs are and where they match up in a APBT's pedigree reveal most anything one wants to know.

I copied this from the APBT section of the Database. You should be able to see bloodlines and pedigrees are most important. Of course there are a millions of Pits and Pit mixes out there owned by people who don't know squat about bloodlines or the breed and hence the problems the breed faces today.  Of course these blind owners can't wait to breed their dog to anything and add to the nightmare. It is an exercise of the Blind leading the Blind by the thousands.

Below is what someone posted on the APBT section of the Database

Please note that I said a reputable registry.  Admittedly I do not and really don't care to know much about pits.  I know that they are not a registered breed, which is why they are listed as "pit bull types," and that they are responsible for the lion's share of fatal attacks against people. 

ProudShepherdPoppa,

I can only second what Abhay said to you. I know this forum isn't really heavy on knowledgeable APBT folks, but still, I had to respond to your comments. I have both working line GSDs and APBTs (papered, lol). Pit Bulls, as a breed, have been bred consistently, to a standard ( a WORKING standard, which the AKC has a tough time comprehending), for far, far longer than a GSD. I must also say that if anyone actually thinks the AKC is reputable....well....LOL.

The term "Pit Bull" has turned into a slang term referring to many breeds that ignorant people can't tell apart, or simply don't care to. It does actually mean only one breed; THE AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER. The problem with statistics is that any bite in which a person *thinks* that the offender MAY have been a Pit Bull is reported as a Pit Bull. Adding to the problem is that people generalize when it's to their advantage, and specify when it's to their advantage. It's easy to throw any short-coated dog w/a tapering tail into the "type" description, but when it comes to breed bans, everyone is careful to exclude the boxer, the AB, etc. etc. One particular breed is suffering tenfold for the sins of many, many breeds. I could go on and on and really lose my temper over this, but it would be pointless. I will close w/the following excerpts by  Diane Jessup, who is well -respected nationally in many working dog circles-not just PB circles. http://www.lawdogsusa.org/whoweare.html has put over 60 training titles on her dogs in areas such as French ring, schutzhund, trac, Bryant Gumble's Eye on iMYTH:The "Pit Bull" is not a purebred breed.

FACT: Pit bulls are actually one of the oldest and certainly one of the purest. Written pit bull pedigrees date into the late 1700's, something very few other breeds can boast of. Pit bulls have been a registered breed longer than most AKC breeds have been in existence. Louis Colby's father, John Colby, gave his son a handwritten pedigree of Colby's Blind Jack, an animal born in 1932. The pedigree stretches back more than 50 years, naming, in Louis Colby's words, "the best fighting dogs in England and America in the past fifty years." In the mid 1880's, the breed was already old.

MYTH: The term "Pit Bull" means all the bull and terrier breeds.

Fact: The media lumps all bulldog breeds and several mastiff breeds together as "pit bulls" because "pit bulls" makes new more sexy. Unethical reporters will lump unrelated breeds as diverse as cane corso mastiffs, presa mastiffs and animals over 100 pounds as "pit bulls".

MYTH: The term "Pit Bull" means all the bull and terrier breeds.

Fact: The term "pit bull" is the shortened form of the name American Pit Bull Terrier, the name by which the breed is registered with the United Kennel Club and American Dog Breeders Association. The term "pit bull" is correctly applied only to dogs of pure American pit bull blood or registry; not to American Staffordshire terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, mixes of these breeds or any other breed.

First you say, you admittedly do not and don't care to know much about Pits.  Then you say, that you know they are not a registered breed, and there is no reputable registry.

Well the A.D.B.A, and millions of people will take great offense to your statement.  The A.D.B.A has been around since 1909 and keeps accurate records on APBT's since 1875.  Does your reputable registry have records of your breed dating back that far?  Since Horand was born in 1895, its unlikely isn't it?

http://www.adbadog.com/p_home.asp

below is one of those registrations that don't exist of an APBT

OK I can accept that, but if thaat is the case why are they not registered?  Like the AKC or not, they ARE the breed registry in the US. 

I do not blame the dogs for the attacks, that would be as silly as blaming a hand grenade for blowing someone to pieces.  However, I would be concerned knowing my neighbor had either a hand grenade OR a pit bull. 

Here is your history lesson for the day!

First you must understand the difference between a breed and a type. Not until the advent of dog shows at the end of the 1800's, did the concept of individual breeds become widely used. Before that, dogs primarily came in types. There were retrievers, pointers, spaniels, greyhounds, huskies, sheepdogs, livestock guardian dogs, hounds, mastiffs and bulldogs as well as several "toy" or "pet" type dogs. Any dog that did the work and looked somewhat like a type of dog was that kind of dog. It is a mistake to believe, though, that our ancestors did not take breeding seriously when breeding dogs for a specific job.

With the advent of dog shows, dogs begin to be bred to conform to a strict written standard of how humans thought they should look. No longer bred for work, but strictly for exhibition, many breeds became non-functional at their original work.

Dog fanciers developed "standards of perfection" for breeds, and subdivided types of dogs into more and more separate breeds. The vast majority of pit bull breeders fought to keep their dogs away from the show ring, and succeeded for several decades. Then, like now, breeder of true performance dogs knew that the show ring spelled ruination for their animals. It wasn't until the 1930's that a very small group of individuals made an attempt to bring the pit bull into the show dog world.

Using several dogs (including Colby's Primo) as the "standard of perfection", a physical standard was drawn up for the pit bull. The name "pit bull" was a problem for these show dog folks - they felt it would scare people off. They tried several names, including Yankee Terrier which was a foolish choice for a bulldog from the United Kingdom! They finally settled on "Staffordshire Terrier". To this day, the debate about whether or not the pit bull should be grouped with terriers (small dogs which go into tunnels for vermin) rages.

At the turn of the last century, the American Dog Breeders Association and the United Kennel Club were already registering pit bulls. When the American Kennel Club accepted the pit bull into their stud books in 1936, UKC and ADBA registered pit bulls got their registered names changed to "Staffordshire Terriers. To add to the confusion, the name "Staffordshire Terrier" was changed to "American Staffordshire Terrier" in the 1970's when the AKC decided that the pit bulls still being bred in England had enough variation in type to warrant being called a different "breed".

So, while the dogs all originated from the same group of animals from the United Kingdom, the dog show world turned them into three different "breeds". The American pit bull terrier, the American Staffordshire terrier and the Staffordshire bull terrier.

This is an excerpt from a convention: http://www.workingpitbull.com/history.htm (for the full story)

by Scoutk9GSDs on 10 November 2007 - 23:11

 This is the excerpt: (cont'd from other post)

Back in the 1980's, I was sitting in a Washington state legislative hearing concerning the possible statewide banning of all bulldog breeds. I was sitting next to the then vice-president of the American Kennel Club. When he stood to speak, his words burned into my memory as some of the most inaccurate, ignorant and snobbish I had ever heard.

"There is," he told the lawmakers looking to him for accurate information, "absolutely no such breed as the 'pit bull'; it is not registered with the American Kennel Club."

As I stared at him, dumbstruck really, I couldn't help but think of the 300 plus breeds which do not happen to grace the stud books of the American Kennel Club. This man certainly did not know his American Staffordshire history - that much was evident. From whence did he think the show-bred brother to the pit bull came from? Was he unaware that the AKC had opened its "pure" stud books to this "non-breed", the "pit bull", not once, but three times (the last time as late as the 1970's)? And yet now, like a Peter, this man was denying the breed which formed the basis for at least three AKC registered breeds, its very identity.

Was it intentional, or truly ignorance? It certainly could have been either, for few breeds have such a straightforward history tangled into knots so fouled that many of its own fanciers can't unravel it.

• « Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next »