A FEW GOOD POINTS FOR ANTI-PIT BULL CAMPAIGNERS

We all run into anti-pit bull people who stand fast on the claim, to them the fact, that pit bulls are solely bred for fighting and thus to be aggressive in nature.  While we ALL know and understand that is not the case and that those who choose to believe all negative press and propaganda on pit bulls don’t, or won’t, understand is that breeding or intention for a dog's behavior does not dictate a dog’s behavior all of the time or as some people believe most of the time.

First of all we need to remind these people that only a very, very small portion of dogs, compared to the total dogs being bred today, are being bred for fighting and/or gameness.  Meaning that dog fighters and their breeding stock make up only a very small portion of pit bull type dogs that are being bred today and that most people who breed pit bulls today do so to lessen or eliminate gameness, eliminate aggressive tendencies and to increase calm, agreeable and acceptable behaviors.  In other words they breed for desired positive temperament, not undesired negative.  This is done of course through what dogs are chosen to be included in the breeding stock.  That is by ethical, responsible, professional breeders.  Backyard breeders may or may not breed for temperament with as much attention given to their breeding stocks temperament but one would think logically that backyard breeders breeding stock is comprised of dogs that they can easily handle that don’t exhibit any serious negative behavior tendencies and are not aggressive.  Solely based on this ‘fact’ they, the anti-pit bull people, should be advised that what pit bull type dogs are being bred for today differs completely, in most cases, from what they were originally bred for or at least when the anti-pit bull people believe they were originally bred for.  So that means that if the anti-pit bull people truly believe that breeding and the characteristics and traits a dog is bred for is so strong in dogs then they MUST accept that A VAST MAJORITY of pit bulls today are being bred to be AND ARE reasonably calm, easily handled, friendly toward all living things and are easily capable of being loving family dogs.

It's always a good idea too to share with anti-pit bull people that even those dogs bred and trained to be aggressive are only bred and trained to be aggressive to other dogs and that in selecting their breeding stock the dog fighters purposefully breed out any signs of aggression toward humans whatsoever.  This is so the dog fighters can easily handle their dogs without worrying about injuries to themselves by dogs that are in a 'fighting state of mind'.

While we remind them of these simple facts in addition we need to ask them to tell us if they believe that every horse bred to be raced ends up being a winner or champion OR is even considered good enough stock to be trained for racing.  These people have to admit that for every horse that is specifically bred to race and to win there are likely hundreds bred with the very same intention that never make the cut because in spite of their ‘breeding’ or heritage they do not have what it takes to be a winner or even a good competitor in the sport of horse racing.  If they can’t admit that simple fact/analogy we need to at the very least give them the idea to ponder. 

 

I think this is a great analogy for the pit bull discussion regarding breed characteristics and how much of a part they play in an animal’s behavior or tendencies behavior-wise.  If someone can admit/accept that every horse bred to win races doesn’t have what it takes to be a winning race horse, or in some cases not even be trained to race, then logically every dog specifically bred to be a fighting dog will not have what it takes to be a fighting dog or even be considered worthy of training to be a fighting dog.  Concurrently we need to bring up the fact that most, if not all, dogs bred for fighting by dog fighters when proven not to have the desired gameness or stomach for fighting is usually used as a bait dog or is killed as unwanted breeding stock by the dog fighter…making these dogs that were specifically bred by the dog fighters to be ‘killers’ the innocent victims of human beings. 

As we all know, these dogs - pit bull type dogs, are typically much more victims of humans than the other way round and this is what we should be saying to the anti-pit bull people instead of how cute, sweet, cuddly and/or lovable pit bulls are as a rule.  They don’t understand our interpretation of what these dogs can be in the right hands however they should be able to understand how these dogs are much more victims of us than we are of them.

In the end we all know, we who have done the research and who have the personal experience with these dogs, that the anti-pit bull campaigners claim that because pit bulls were once bred to be aggressive (have high game/prey drive and tenacity) that means they are all aggressive today is completely unfounded and has no anecdotal, no statistical data and/or no scientific evidence to support those claims.  In other words these poor misled people are allowing the fears and lies of others to influence how they view dogs and most especially how they view pit bull type dogs.

WHEN FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS NOT A GOOD THING

This morning this writer got a real eye opener, as if I needed one, in regard to the bias of the news media and how they use the ‘freedom of the press’ to drive certain ideas or limit others from surfacing.  I was watching, well mostly listening to, a local newscast this morning as I do every morning while putting on my make-up to ready myself for work.  This morning one of our local news stations, the one we watch every morning, had a segment about the Yellow Ribbon Project which is a grassroots movement by dog owners to create a way by which other people can understand that their dog should be approached with care or caution when in public.  If the reader hasn’t heard of this Yellow Ribbon Project the premise is that if ‘everyone’, and it would take EVERYONE knowing about this to work, knew that when they come across a dog sporting a yellow ribbon, a yellow collar, a yellow vest or anything yellow and conspicuous that the dog wasn’t one that was comfortable with being approached and one should ask the owner first and/or approach calmly.  I won’t speak to what this writer thinks of this method of helping one’s dogs feel less threatened by strangers or other dogs in this blog but at a later time I will give my opinion on the program.  Today I want to speak to what one of the news anchors commented during this segment, what the segment guest (who was a veterinarian) said and the stations reaction to the public’s comments on the post on their Facebook page that ensued.

At any rate I was listening to/watching this segment of the newscast and thought I heard the anchor man say something that didn’t sound quite kosher.  I asked my husband to rewind it so I could hear it again to be sure that what I thought he said was actually what he said.  Well yes he did say what I thought he said and that was, “So this yellow ribbon isn’t necessarily just for aggressive breeds like pit bulls right?”  To which the veterinarian replied, “Yes that’s right.”  I don’t know which person this writer was most angry with; the news anchor who suggested that there are aggressive breeds and pit bulls are one or the veterinarian who should know better missing the opportunity to correct the news anchor about his assumption that first of all there are aggressive breeds and secondly pit bulls are one of them.  Either way I wasn’t about to just sit there and listen to it and felt that as a pit bull owner and advocate that I had to do something to let the news station know that ignorance of that magnitude needed to be addressed and corrected.

So when I got to work I immediately penned a message to the news station that I posted on their Facebook page as a comment on the thread that was started by their posting of the information about the segment about the Yellow Ribbon Project.  It was calm.  It was rational.  It was pretty much a request for their anchor reporter to educate himself about aggressive breeds, in that there aren’t any inherently aggressive breeds, and about pit bulls in general.  I also invited the news anchor and any of their news reporters to meet with my advocacy so we can share some valid information with them as well as stating that there was a standing invitation to their news staff to join us on one of our monthly bully walks so they would be able to see that responsible dog owners have safe dogs no matter what kind of dog.  I hoped that through commenting in a rational, calm, non-judgmental manner and inviting them to come and learn from personal experience about pit bulls and what determines that a dog becomes aggressive that they might actually take us up on it.  I invited them to come meet with us or walk with us with or without their cameras in the hope that they might be interested in finding out some information that would actually be a benefit to the public to hear as opposed to misinformation and conjecture based on a news anchors personal opinion or maybe just a lack of knowledge on his part.

We all know the way the news media handles pit bulls when there’s an incident where an alleged pit bull has harmed someone and I suppose we’ve learned that there’s nothing to be done to change this approach by the news media, however suggesting in passing when discussing a totally unrelated issue that pit bulls are one of the ‘aggressive breeds’ is something that we can address and should not allow to stand without public comment.  So in addition to commenting on their Facebook page myself I called out the troops and asked all of our Bully Walks to please comment on the news stations Facebook page as well; on the thread about the Yellow Ribbon Project.  People started posting their comments and as requested by me when I called them to speak out they posted calm, rational and informational comments asking the station to please become more educated about what determines that a dog is aggressive, not the breed, and about pit bulls.  Some people posted photos of their dogs along with their comments.  I was so proud of the pit bull owning community because EVERYONE without exception posted mature, calm, rational and non-judgmental comments on that thread.  In fact so many people were posting that the thread kind of turned into commentary on how the news media presents information about pit bulls in general.  I guess you could say that we took the thread over but in a good way without a single negative comment.

Well I guess the news people decided that they would refuse to hear it so they took the thread off the page.  It started around 8:00 AM and by around noon the whole thread was gone…the original post and all.  People still posted their comments however without the thread being there which was good.

So there you have it.  The news media selects what stories to report and also what details they share when reporting a story.  I guess you might say that they own the information so they can twist it all they want (thanks John Mayer for the words) but if anyone stands up and points out that their information is twisted, inaccurate or incomplete they won’t have it.  Wow.  They have ‘freedom of the press’ and we are all expected to support their right as given by our forefathers so long ago by not trying to censor the press.  But on the other hand when they use their right to report what they want when they want and we stand up and ask them to correct it or withdraw it because it’s simply not true on any level then they feel they can censor us.  I’m not too sure exactly how that works really.  This writer is extremely confused as to why they can say whatever they want, true or not-based on actuality or not, and then when we say we won’t accept that information because we know it’s misinformation they can silence us; well at least when we are posting on social media on their account.  Freedom of speech is supposed to apply to everyone but I guess it doesn’t, not anymore, not in our country.