Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If you believe Pit Bulls are inherently dangerous animals, & you support BSL to ban them [View all]Major Nikon
(36,925 posts)97. The "actual science" says certain breeds are more likely to kill, contrary to your propaganda
The AVMA is against BSL, but acknowledge that fatal dog attacks are a "breed-specific problem".
Abstract
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
September 15, 2000, Vol. 217, No. 6, Pages 836-840
doi: 10.2460/javma.2000.217.836
Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998
Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, MPH Leslie Sinclair, DVM Julie Gilchrist, MD Gail C. Golab, PhD, DVM Randall Lockwood, PhD
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, US Department of Health and Human Services, US Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE (MS K-63), Atlanta, GA 30341. (Sacks, Gilchrist); Present address is National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE (MS K-45), Atlanta, GA 30341. (Sacks); The Humane Society of the United States, 2100 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037. (Sinclair, Lockwood); Present address is Shelter Veterinary Services, 9320 Jarrett Ct, Montgomery Village, MD 20886. (Sinclair); Division of Education and Research, American Veterinary Medical Association, 931 N Meacham Rd, Ste 100, Schaumburg, IL 60173. (Golab)
ObjectiveTo summarize breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks during a 20-year period and to assess policy implications.
AnimalsDogs for which breed was reported involved in attacks on humans between 1979 and 1998 that resulted in human dog bite-related fatalities (DBRF).
ProcedureData for human DBRF identified previously for the period of 1979 through 1996 were combined with human DBRF newly identified for 1997 and 1998. Human DBRF were identified by searching news accounts and by use of The Humane Society of the United States' registry databank.
ResultsDuring 1997 and 1998, at least 27 people died of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997 and 9 in 1998). At least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in 238 human DBRF during the past 20 years. Pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers were involved in more than half of these deaths. Of 227 reports with relevant data, 55 (24%) human deaths involved unrestrained dogs off their owners' property, 133 (58%) involved unrestrained dogs on their owners' property, 38 (17%) involved restrained dogs on their owners' property, and 1 (< 1%) involved a restrained dog off its owner's property.
ConclusionsAlthough fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog's breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:836840)
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
September 15, 2000, Vol. 217, No. 6, Pages 836-840
doi: 10.2460/javma.2000.217.836
Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998
Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, MPH Leslie Sinclair, DVM Julie Gilchrist, MD Gail C. Golab, PhD, DVM Randall Lockwood, PhD
Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, US Department of Health and Human Services, US Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE (MS K-63), Atlanta, GA 30341. (Sacks, Gilchrist); Present address is National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE (MS K-45), Atlanta, GA 30341. (Sacks); The Humane Society of the United States, 2100 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037. (Sinclair, Lockwood); Present address is Shelter Veterinary Services, 9320 Jarrett Ct, Montgomery Village, MD 20886. (Sinclair); Division of Education and Research, American Veterinary Medical Association, 931 N Meacham Rd, Ste 100, Schaumburg, IL 60173. (Golab)
ObjectiveTo summarize breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks during a 20-year period and to assess policy implications.
AnimalsDogs for which breed was reported involved in attacks on humans between 1979 and 1998 that resulted in human dog bite-related fatalities (DBRF).
ProcedureData for human DBRF identified previously for the period of 1979 through 1996 were combined with human DBRF newly identified for 1997 and 1998. Human DBRF were identified by searching news accounts and by use of The Humane Society of the United States' registry databank.
ResultsDuring 1997 and 1998, at least 27 people died of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997 and 9 in 1998). At least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in 238 human DBRF during the past 20 years. Pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers were involved in more than half of these deaths. Of 227 reports with relevant data, 55 (24%) human deaths involved unrestrained dogs off their owners' property, 133 (58%) involved unrestrained dogs on their owners' property, 38 (17%) involved restrained dogs on their owners' property, and 1 (< 1%) involved a restrained dog off its owner's property.
ConclusionsAlthough fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog's breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:836840)
http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/javma.2000.217.836?journalCode=javma
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
147 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
If you believe Pit Bulls are inherently dangerous animals, & you support BSL to ban them [View all]
baldguy
Oct 2016
OP
If you don't "believe" some dogs are more likely to attack and kill than others
ronnie624
Oct 2016
#4
Dogs that are not properly trained & solcialized, or are subject to abuse & neglect can be dangerous
baldguy
Oct 2016
#7
Excellent point, these killer dogs are obviously NOT pit bulls, but have been maligned by the media
Major Nikon
Oct 2016
#14
Your powers of reasoning are definitely overwhelming and you make an excellent argument here
Major Nikon
Oct 2016
#94
Just like any other rational response to an individual posing a threat to public safety.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#9
Ever notice how some anti-gun people use similar arguments to defend pit bulls
LongtimeAZDem
Oct 2016
#10
Every time a pitbull kills a person, you guys say, "it's not the dog, it's the owner"
LongtimeAZDem
Oct 2016
#24
The NRA and their allies advocate policies with exasperate the problem of gun violence.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#25
Pit Bulls do not commit the vast majority of lethal dog attacks. That is a lie.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#34
Nowhere in my comments have I supported breed-specific legislation; you comment is another lie
LongtimeAZDem
Oct 2016
#123
Nope; I merely pointed out that you use the same arguments as those you oppose
LongtimeAZDem
Oct 2016
#128
And now you're denying the thing that you did, that everyone can see that you did.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#129
Indeed; and as long as you take the appropriate care to ensure that neither
LongtimeAZDem
Oct 2016
#42
Hysteria is pretending one type of dog is responsable for the actions of humans who mistreat dogs.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#134
No I am thinking pipe bombs are not something you take the risk with for a reason
Egnever
Oct 2016
#139
And still the people that create aggressive dogs have no responsibility in your eyes.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#140
"Pit Bull" indentified visually - when identifying a breed visually is no better than random chance.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#27
So, you want to kill MY dog b/c the owner of some random dog in your neighborhood is a callous jerk?
baldguy
Oct 2016
#41
The entire intent & rationale for BSLs is to reduce dog bites. They don't do that.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#44
I guess I have little sympathy because I was recently almost attacked by two neighborhood pits
womanofthehills
Oct 2016
#53
If you had been bitten by one of these man killers instead, you would not be posting today
Jim Beard
Oct 2016
#61
The "actual science" says certain breeds are more likely to kill, contrary to your propaganda
Major Nikon
Oct 2016
#97
Good grief! Some of these responses make this thread sound like Free Republic.
hamsterjill
Oct 2016
#56
I am with you 100% - and their apologists are doing a disservice to so many who pay the price
DrDan
Oct 2016
#99
A large lab can't inflict the same kind damage? Tell that to Isabelle Dinoire.
baldguy
Oct 2016
#144