Mall Santa refuses to see kid

Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum

Help Support Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I would respectfully request that if you are going to say statistics indicate something, provide the statistical evidence, otherwise it's just a random statement on the internet.

No one will change my mind about breed specific legislation or breed discrimination though. If something isn't a nuisance to a community then it should be a non-issue. I am responsible, my dog hasn't bit anyone, but I pay higher premiums without much complaint because that's is part of owning her, but I still don't have to like it.

 
I would respectfully request that if you are going to say statistics indicate something, provide the statistical evidence, otherwise it's just a random statement on the internet.

No one will change my mind about breed specific legislation or breed discrimination though. If something isn't a nuisance to a community then it should be a non-issue. I am responsible, my dog hasn't bit anyone, but I pay higher premiums without much complaint because that's is part of owning her, but I still don't have to like it.
http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/images/dogbreeds-a.pdf

—During 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.
 
Your same paper states the following

Another concern is that a ban on a specific breed might cause people who want a dangerous dog to simply turn to another breed for the same qualities they sought in the original dog (eg, large size, aggression easily fostered). Breed-specific legislation does not address the fact that a dog of any breed can become dangerous when bred or trained to be aggressive.

Because (1) fatal bites constitute less than 0.00001% of all dog bites annually, (2) fatal bites have remained relatively constant over time, whereas nonfatal bites have been increasing, and (3) fatal bites are rare at the usual political level where bite regulations are promulgated and enforced, we believe that fatal bites should not be the primary factor driving public policy regarding dog bite prevention

The denominator of a dog breed-specific human DBRF rate requires reliable breed-specific population data. Unfortunately, such data are not currently available. Considering American Kennel Club registration data for Rottweilers in parallel with fatality data for that breed indicates that as the breed has soared in popularity, so have Rottweiler-related deaths (24,195 registrations from 1979 through 1982 and 0 deaths; 272,273 registrations from 1983 through 1990 and 6 deaths; and 692,799 registrations from 1991 through 1998 and 33 deaths). However, official registration or licensing data are likely to be biased, as owners of certain dog breeds may be less likely than those owning other breeds to
register or license their dogs and, thus, should not be used to calculate these rates. Finally, it is imperative to keep in mind that even if breed-specific bite rates could
be accurately calculated, they do not factor in owner related issues. For example, less responsible owners or owners who want to foster aggression in their dogs may
be drawn deferentially to certain breeds.
It comes back to the owners intentions, actions and the control they have over their dog. Also, looking closely into how they presented their statistics (surprisingly not as twisted as I expected), check out the difference between the numbers when analyzing it by death- not by dog, this obviously indicates that many of the fatalities involved more than one animal involved in the incident.

I did want to point out this last fact too... because I'm curious if this is telling me me someone seriously died from fire ant bites after being pushed on a mound by a dog?

A human DBRF was defined as a human death caused by trauma from a dog bite. In addition to excluding 9 human deaths, as described in previous reports (eg, dying of rabies from a dog bite, strangling on a leash or scarf pulled by a dog, dying from fire antbites after being pushed on a mound by a dog, or dying from a motor vehicle or bicycle crash while being chased by a dog), for 1997 and 1998, we excluded 3 additional deaths: death resulting from infection secondary to a dog bite, death attributable to trauma from
being knocked over but not bitten, and death resulting from myocardial infarction, which was caused by an individual being chased but not bitten. For the 20-year study, we excluded 4 human deaths from attacks by guard or police dogs “at work” and approximately 90 deaths when breed information for the attacking dog was unavailable; thus, this study included approximately 72% of cases of human DBRF and is not exhaustive.
 
Typically, the most important part of a paper is it's conclusions.

Conclusions—Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-typedogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite andcause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog’s breed with certainty,enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises con-stitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks representa 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 andhold promise for prevention of dog bites. (J Am VetMed Assoc2000;217:836–840)
Note that the conclusions for this paper, despite finding that pit bull-type dogs and rotties are the greatest offenders, is against breed-specific legislation.

This organization however, takes a different point of view.

http://www.dogsbite.org/pdf/dogsbiteorg-cdc-remedies-dog-maulings-and-fatalities.pdf

 
Hey, you asked for data, and I presented data. I tried to find the least biased source I could, and one that actually looked at a broad spectrum of data. You can choose to be defensive about your dog, and try to ignore their genetic disposition if you wish. But I have never heard somebody try to defend their dog by saying "well, they're pretty aggressive, but I have good control over them." Usually, it's "they've never been aggressive towards anybody before...this attack came out of the blue."

 
He was a quiet neighbor, never said anything to anyone, until he went off and killed 40 people at the mall :)

just kidding

everyone breathe!

I have had people come ask me if my border is part coyote, because she is red and white instead of black and white. (they walk with that hunched back like a coyote) I just reply, yes, we bread a husky and a coyote for fun to see how many kids they could eat if I let them off the leash..

I didn't really think Shepard's were biters, but they are very protective

 
I was once chased by an unleased pit bull while in San Francisco. I tucked into a doorway and bowed my legs so that it would bite the fabric instead of my skin. The owner acted like I had somehow incited the dog by approaching the bus stop. "He's never done that before" is a BS thing to hear when you've just feared for your personal safety. The dog also wasn't on a leash.

I also know several pit bulls that are sweethearts.

But what I really came here to say was, "Abcde? Really?" because I don't think we've talked about THAT nearly enough.

 
Here I am at work, overseeing highway construction:

costume-sexy-bbb4-m6099orangeblue_1_1.jpg


 
Back
Top