Fact or fiction...Pitbulls

Ultimately, regardless of the way you look at it there's three people that get their mitts on pit bulls that ... shouldn't.

1) thugs & criminals - people wanting to intimidate. These are oftentimes the fools that have human aggressive pit bulls because that is what they want - the breed itself is dog aggressive but it isn't supposed to be human aggressive.


2) "dogmen" - pit bull fighters. A family associate - not necessarily friend - was an old fashion dogman so I know what it's like; it was never classy but there was some ... respect for the dogs and they just weren't pieces of meat to all such individuals.

I frequent a forum for such ... yeah they exist, you just have to look and know what they're referring to when they say stuff. Modern "dogmen" - I put these sorts in quotes as a majority aren't real dogmen just losers with no talent looking for quick money - as my grandfather, an Irishman, would say they're the sort that don't have the balls to make it in the boxing ring (or life) so they have to be "manly" somehow. I just really watch [I'm no cop, it's not my job to investigate], and there's a number of them that say things which make you wish you could reach through the screen and strangle them.

Most of them have no respect for the dogs - some claim they do, they're flat out lying but it makes them feel a little more human to play at being humane - and no respect for the people / pets they're putting at risk. There's a number of these sort that admit they run like rats from a sinking ship [oftentimes involving rental properties or near attacks] when the sh*t hits the fan.


3) new / inexperienced dog owners. I worked at a shelter, the management refused flat out to give anyone whom had no prior experience with anything resembling a pit bull the option of adopting.

A little extreme, to some maybe, but it wasn't a risk they were willing to take.

There is another problem with the insurance issues--and with the issue of mutts. I've always had mixed breeds that have been terrier mixes of some sort (or at least they have been listed as such--I've never done the DNA testing). One was about forty-five pounds but the rest were right around twenty to twenty-four pounds. None of them could have been remotely identified as being even part pitbull (see my avatar for reference). But because the local humane society lists all its pitbull and pittie mixes as "terrier mixes" so that people who rent can identify them as such to avoid the problems people with pitbulls can have renting (and a humane society representative admitted they do exactly that in an article in a local dog publication), anybody with a terrier mix can end up having trouble renting or getting insurance, even if what they own is part Westie and obviously not a bully breed. Fortunately, my insurance agent is more understanding and I own my own home and thus do not deal with landlords, but it bothers me that if my circumstances were different, the issues caused by people who breed/own pitbulls who shouldn't could be affecting me and my dogs as well.

And with regard to the XL Pits, I ran into what was probably a pitbull/Mastiff mix at a local park--or rather, I avoided running into him. My dog and I were about four city blocks away when I parked the car and let my leashed dog out so that we could walk the greenway. The XL Pit and his owner--who was extremely out of shape and obviously not capable of going after his dog if it had gotten away from him--were in the playground area. His dog saw mine at that extreme distance, leapt to its feet, and made it very clear that if it could get to us, it would destroy my dog and perhaps me as well. What did his owner do? He laughed, as I went a literal mile in the opposite direction to catch the greenway at a different juncture so that we wouldn't get any closer to that dog. Meanwhile his owner obviously thought it was funny that he could keep every other dog out of that area of the park because his dog was so "tough." I shudder to think what would have happened if the dog had been irritated by any of the couple of dozen children or their parents who were in that playground area. I seriously doubt the owner could have controlled that dog even if he had wanted to bother to do so.

Although to redact my previous statement a bit... yeah I'd be more leery of a guardian breed like a mastiff than a smaller, non-guardian breed dog. But I don't see how that's related to "pit bulls" at all. Why do all scary looking short haired dogs get lumped into one category? I fail to see the similarity between a 100+ lb guardian breed and my 50 lb bully mutt.

The only dog I've ever been truly afraid of was a Briard. A clueless family I used to babysit for owned this huge fluffy dog, and my first night of babysitting he cornered me in a room while holding their baby and gave me a warning bite (snap? I don't know, he made light contact) to the arm. I made them crate for a while after, and never trusted him. He never became friendly towards me. But he gets dragged around the city without a blink of anyone's eyes because he's not reminiscent of a "pit bull" or some other "scary" dog breed.

Eenypup said:

Just because bullies are often dog aggressive to some extent - that dog is not any more likely than another mutt or dog of a background you don't know to start attacking humans. I mean sure, an untrained large dog with an irresponsible owner is a nuisance at best and a danger at worst, but I hope you didn't shudder because of the dog being a "mastiff/bully" of some kind. Although perhaps the sheer size was intimidating if the dog was mastiff-like.

Click to expand...

I have a friend with both a mastiff and a Newfoundland who are lovely dogs. I've been around other giant breeds and have no problem with them. I had a problem with this dog because he was clearly out of control and the guy who had the dog thought it was amusing that his dog was causing such a scene about my dog being a good four blocks away that I couldn't go out for a walk on a public greenway (where, again, my leashed dog would have been at least a block away from him) without going way out of my way for safety's sake. My concern was that if someone irritated the dog--and I did specifically mention the word"irritated"--that the dog might decide he didn't care for that person either and that his owner was not likely to be able to handle that much dog even if he were inclined to do so. It's also not like it was entirely unlikely that he and his dog weren't going to see another dog on a beautiful weekend spring afternoon at a large and popular city park attached to the greenway that follows the river through my city. He was either setting his dog up to fail or he just didn't care that everyone else was going to have to work around his inability to control his dog or just his plain lack of interest in doing so because it amused him that his big, tough dog would force anyone else with a dog to avoid the area he had staked out as his--an area that it was pretty much necessary to cross if you were coming into the park from the parking lot and wanted access to the prettiest, most popular part of the greenway river walk. He was also not walking his dog or giving it any exercise at all. He was just sitting there on a park bench while his dog snarled and leapt to the end of the leash at any dog that crossed his line of vision--which was certainly not doing much for some of the kids who were playing on the nearby playground either, as the dog sounded and looked scary even to someone like me, who's used to being around all sizes and shapes of dogs, even if the ones I own tend to be around twenty pounds or so.

As I've said in earlier posts, I've met some great and some not-so-great bully breed dogs, and ninety percent (or more) of the time, the problems I've seen with individual dogs have been owner-based because the dogs have either been handled by someone who thought their poor behavior was "cool" or because they've been handled by someone who just isn't capable of handling a breed of that size. The guy I saw in the park, sadly, seemed to land in both categories, and if that dog had decided to lunge at a dog foolish enough to get near him, I doubt he could have controlled him even if he'd tried. Given his temperament and his owner's lackadaisical attitude about that temperament, I was concerned that it was possible--possible, not inevitable--that the dog could be upset by a human approaching him in a way he found distasteful and that something bad would happen as a result.

Eenypup said:

Although to redact my previous statement a bit... yeah I'd be more leery of a guardian breed like a mastiff than a smaller, non-guardian breed dog. But I don't see how that's related to "pit bulls" at all. Why do all scary looking short haired dogs get lumped into one category? I fail to see the similarity between a 100+ lb guardian breed and my 50 lb bully mutt.

The only dog I've ever been truly afraid of was a Briard. A clueless family I used to babysit for owned this huge fluffy dog, and my first night of babysitting he cornered me in a room while holding their baby and gave me a warning bite (snap? I don't know, he made light contact) to the arm. I made them crate for a while after, and never trusted him. He never became friendly towards me. But he gets dragged around the city without a blink of anyone's eyes because he's not reminiscent of a "pit bull" or some other "scary" dog breed.

Click to expand...

It's related to pit bulls because a poster upthread mentioned that he/she knew of people who were attempting to breed super-sized pitbulls much larger than the standard pitbull. My comment was that I thought I'd seen something that would fall into that category, though I have no idea if the dog I saw was a purposeful cross or just an accidental one. He was enormous, however, and I've been around standard-sized mastiffs, so I suspect something of that size was in the mix there, though the shape of the head was more bully breed than mastiff. Again, as was mentioned upthread, it's scary enough when standard sized pitties end up with people who have no idea what they should be doing with them (or any dog, for that matter), so the idea of a super-sized version in the wrong hands was even scarier--and I added the specific example of seeing a similar situation that was indeed not good. The discussion was really about why that kind of breeding is not a good idea for anyone, including, if not especially, the dogs themselves because very few people would probably be the right owners for a dog that big and strong and, unfortunately, some of the people who would want one would probably be exactly the worst people to own one. And besides, it's already hard enough to find appropriate homes for all the standard sized homeless bully breeds out there. Adding extra large ones to the mix is just needlessly complicating the problem.

And just to be clear, there are some small, ill-tempered individual dogs I wouldn't let my dog near either. But if he had to, he could probably fend for himself against an irate toy poodle. Even a big dog who was just playing could accidentally hurt him--in fact, he accidentally collided with a neighbor's golden retriever when they were chasing each other around the yard, and he got knocked straight off his feet. Now when he plays with that golden, he's careful to keep a little more distance between them. So, if there's a large dog who's clearly dog reactive--a bully/mastiff cross, a St. Bernard, an Irish wolfhound, it makes no difference--I'm going to keep my dog out of the line of fire, so to speak. That's especially true if the dog is being handled by someone who's clueless or just doesn't care.

Eenypup said:

Although to redact my previous statement a bit... yeah I'd be more leery of a guardian breed like a mastiff than a smaller, non-guardian breed dog. But I don't see how that's related to "pit bulls" at all. Why do all scary looking short haired dogs get lumped into one category? I fail to see the similarity between a 100+ lb guardian breed and my 50 lb bully mutt.

The only dog I've ever been truly afraid of was a Briard. A clueless family I used to babysit for owned this huge fluffy dog, and my first night of babysitting he cornered me in a room while holding their baby and gave me a warning bite (snap? I don't know, he made light contact) to the arm. I made them crate for a while after, and never trusted him. He never became friendly towards me. But he gets dragged around the city without a blink of anyone's eyes because he's not reminiscent of a "pit bull" or some other "scary" dog breed.

Click to expand...

I think the more clueless one at that point was you, not the dog nor the owners. Look up the breed, it was merely doing what is was bred for. And that is guard. The baby was its to protect and you, a stranger, were manhandling it. Because if the Briard was really going after you, it'd have gone after you.


As for why do all the scary dogs get lumped into pit bull the reason - human scum that shouldn't own a fruit fly.

You want to know what I mean google the cow that let loose two pits on a guy walking to church in the Bronx. Woman has no control over the mutts and then has the nerve to lie - because I doubt she's telling the truth, her 2 + 2 just doesn't make 4 - by saying that she and the man "exchanged words" so it was alright for her to just "drop the leashes" [she admits, she just dropped the leashes]. That's just one example of the reason why people are afraid.

And yeah mastiff type pit bulls ARE becoming a problem of have you Eenypup not being reading up on the breed. There's XL pits, XXL pits. Some of them are nothing but fat bully dogs and about as really threatening to a human as a three legged cat... but some kennels do breed correct LARGE pitbulls.

And that's the problem if you didn't know ... people breeding big pits on the street to be tougher.

Reflex said:

I think the more clueless one at that point was you, not the dog nor the owners. Look up the breed, it was merely doing what is was bred for. And that is guard. The baby was its to protect and you, a stranger, were manhandling it. Because if the Briard was really going after you, it'd have gone after you.


As for why do all the scary dogs get lumped into pit bull the reason - human scum that shouldn't own a fruit fly.

You want to know what I mean google the cow that let loose two pits on a guy walking to church in the Bronx. Woman has no control over the mutts and then has the nerve to lie - because I doubt she's telling the truth, her 2 + 2 just doesn't make 4 - by saying that she and the man "exchanged words" so it was alright for her to just "drop the leashes" [she admits, she just dropped the leashes]. That's just one example of the reason why people are afraid.

And yeah mastiff type pit bulls ARE becoming a problem of have you Eenypup not being reading up on the breed. There's XL pits, XXL pits. Some of them are nothing but fat bully dogs and about as really threatening to a human as a three legged cat... but some kennels do breed correct LARGE pitbulls.

And that's the problem if you didn't know ... people breeding big pits on the street to be tougher.

Click to expand...

You really think I am unaware that Briards are guardian breeds and he was protecting the baby? It was not me who was clueless - the parents told me he would 1000% fine with me handling the baby and not to worry even though he was unfriendly with me from the start. I expressed concern because he did not appreciate me entering his home, and they swore up and down he was the friendliest mushball in the world. I mean yes I was stupid to believe them and not think his breed traits would prevail, but I sure as heck would still categorize the owners as "clueless" and not me. When I explained the situation and asked that they crate the dog because he didn't like me holding the baby, they thought I was crazy to not think their dog was the biggest sweetheart in the world. He was guarding the baby and they wouldn't believe it. That's not my fault.

And there's no such thing as a "big pit". So that's where you're wrong, not me. An XXXL American Bully is NOT the same thing as a 45 lb ABPT, nor are those mastiff-sized dogs under that category either. I read up plenty on APBTs although I don't own one, but clearly you do not.

And I still fail to see how a mastiff mutt of 100+ lb is similar at all to a 50 lb bully mutt. So that point stands as to how these conversations are linked at all.

The term American Pit Bull Terrier is specific. However, even pit bull rescues like Bad Rap indicate on their sites that the generic term "pit bull" popularly refers to a variety of dogs, quite often mixes, just like other terms that refer to larger groups of dogs such as terriers, spaniels, retrievers etc. as opposed to a specific breed. So, it seems to me, that some posters might interpret the term that way too, so that someone's foolish attempt to breed a huge pit bull by crossing a typical bully breed with a mastiff would be fair game to bring up in a post about pit bulls, and it wouldn't be inappropriate for someone else to respond to that post. No one's endorsing the idea of such a breeding attempt or blaming all pit bull owners, much less pit bulls, for it. All the posts I've read are generally blaming the perception of pit bulls as "dangerous" or "bad" on situations where the dogs were owned or bred (or both) by the wrong people. The same can be true of any breed if it becomes too popular or profitable. It just happens to be occurring with the pit bull right now. If all the posts discussing irresponsible breeding or ownership were eliminated from the thread, the thread certainly wouldn't be five pages long at this point, and really, isn't irresponsible breeding and/or ownership at the heart of the perception problems the American Pit Bull terrier is having? Also, the original poster did say it was okay to bring up personal experience stories as long as they weren't used to "prove" that all pit bulls were bad or good, and so far as I can tell, no one has done that, including myself. We've spoken about specific situations that illustrated why some people really shouldn't be handling/owning/breeding pit bulls and how their behavior reflects badly on pit bulls, however specifically or generically someone might be using that term.

I have nothing against the American Pit Bull Terrier as a breed or against the larger group of dogs commonly referred to as pit bulls. I think the current number of the those commonly referred to as pit bulls is problematic because there aren't enough appropriate homes for them and inappropriate homes cause problems for everyone, including the dogs. And, unfortunately, I don't have an answer as to how to best fix that situation and am not certain anyone really does.

I get what you are saying. I understand why one might mention a Pit Bull mix in a Pit Bull discussion....But I wouldn't say that using it as a generic term is a good idea. Not specifically in this particular discussion especially because that would almost render it pointless. If we are to speak about the "fact" or "fiction" including reliable sources and anecdotes then we would very well need to be talking about the same animal.
If 1 poster is talking about Pit Bull & Pit Bull mixes and another poster is talking about Pits & Am Bulldogs, another is talking about American Bullies, another is talking about pull dogs and yet another is talking about all of the above and more breeds how can we come to any conclusions. We are not even talking about the same subject.
I think BadRap's point is that since they can't be positive of a dog's heritage they call them pit bulls because that's what they appear to be, but they may or may not actually be APBT (some might be) and could be Pit mixes are mixes of other bully breeds that look like Pits. The DNA researched proved that dogs commonly called PB are mixed breed dogs. So therefore identification by physical appearance is woefully inaccurate.
Which is actually a huge part of the Pit Bull problem. Mis labeled dogs.

I think your experience is considered relevant, just as I might mention an experience with a Lab mix in a Lab discussion. However I would not mention experiences with all other retriever breeds or mixes there of as if they were of equal representation. As they are not. Even though some of those breeds are very closely related to Labs, just as the Staffy Bull or even many Am Bulldog are to the APBT.

Rain said:

Thing is they are so far from what a pure bred APBT is supposed to be, structure and weight wise, that they should not be labeled a pit bull anymore then my Chi x Dach should be labeled a Dachshund simply because he has the chest of one. They're mutts.


Take a look at this dog, you may already know about him, https://www.thedodo.com/giant-pit-bull-hulk-puppies-1268745401.html , aside from the head shape that looks nothing like an APBT, he looks like an overweight mutt. Look up the kennel's FB page and watch what they train those dogs to do. Thanks to them the negative view of pit bulls, and people knowing nothing about what a true APBT looks like, is perpetuated. It also makes the thugs, gangstas, and wannabes want pit bulls all the more.

Click to expand...

I've just been lurking but I have to add that I was so irritated when I saw that they bred Hulk. That is not a dog that's going to have nearly the lifespan of a healthy, normal weighted APBT - and neither are his poor puppies. I can only assume he bred Hulk with the largest female he could find to further his status of having the largest "Pit Bulls" in the world, when really he has the largest mixed breeds doomed to a short life. Those puppies will likely be used as investments by people who just want to get their hands on "the most powerful puppies in the world" and with that price tag it makes me wonder how much work went into finding good owners, or if that work was trumped out by finding the person willing to pay the most money.

Selling a litter with dreadful and problematic proportions at half a million dollars while pushing the agenda that pit bulls should be massive powerful killing machines is wrong wrong wrong.

SpicyBulldog said:

While I don't like breeders of that type for some of the very reasons stated (misrepresentation, making money, catering to the wrong types) I don't know that we can make the assumption they will have a short life. Chevy himself lived to be 14+yrs old (still performing at 10yrs or so) and I've known similar bred dogs in their teens too. So it's in line with pure bred APBTs lifespan.

Click to expand...

Great Dane average lifespan: 6-8 years
Mastiff average lifespan: 10-12 years
Newfoundland average lifespan: 8-12 years
Cane Corso: 10-11
Bernese Mountain Dog: 6-8
Saint Bernard: 8-10

HEALTHY well bred large breeds don't live very long on average. A dog bred to be as large as possible just for status, LIKELY won't live long, and breeding a dog for sheer size and power is a BAD reason to breed imo. Weight and size can cause major issues in hip, knee, joint, bone, ligament, heart, hypothyroidism, bloat/torsion, entropion/ectropion (huge eyelids and excessive folds that is clear in Hulk), etc. A dog who is bred with the expectations to have large puppies, as boasted by in the video where he states the one he was holding will be "almost as big as his dad!" can only be assumed was paired with a large dog in an attempt to create large puppies to sell for half a million dollars.

Not to mention they're labeled widely as Pit Bull when really they're a mix.

cos said:

Great Dane average lifespan: 6-8 years
Mastiff average lifespan: 10-12 years
Newfoundland average lifespan: 8-12 years
Cane Corso: 10-11
Bernese Mountain Dog: 6-8
Saint Bernard: 8-10

HEALTHY well bred large breeds don't live very long on average. A dog bred to be as large as possible just for status, LIKELY won't live long, and breeding a dog for sheer size and power is a BAD reason to breed imo. Weight and size can cause major issues in hip, knee, joint, bone, ligament, heart, hypothyroidism, bloat/torsion, entropion/ectropion (huge eyelids and excessive folds that is clear in Hulk), etc. A dog who is bred with the expectations to have large puppies, as boasted by in the video where he states the one he was holding will be "almost as big as his dad!" can only be assumed was paired with a large dog in an attempt to create large puppies to sell for half a million dollars.

Not to mention they're labeled widely as Pit Bull when really they're a mix.

Click to expand...

Danes die young due to serious cancers being widespread and a hereditary heart issue. Any breed that has a deadly issue will have a short lifespan. Flatcoats also are said to have short lifespan due to cancer. They are not an XL breed.
I wouldn't call 10-12 (of mastiff) that bad for a giant size dog. Boxers are the same and they are med-large.

My Cane Corso is almost 9yrs old so I hope that's not going to hold true. She has a good genetic history so I'm hopeful.

I don't know about any of those other breeds really and there are no stats on the Working Pit Bulldog or the like, what are you considering short. I already said I disagree with DDK9s breeding program and their misrepresentation. I'm only commenting on the assumption of short lifespan because Chevy lived 14yrs still going at 10yrs retired an Ace of Ace XX. I believe Demon Killa will have a good run too. Big Griff was still producing at 10yrs old I think. Ghostface has structure like Kickass Kicker better than Hulk's, obviously they want to go bigger. Hulk is also fat so that could impact his life span. I'm not saying he will live long but I wouldn't jump to conclusions. These dogs existed without major health issues and decent lifespan before DDK9s "fame" they are completely disgraceful and again I don't agree with what they are doing.

cos said:

I see what you're saying, however I still think that breeding dogs for largeness will negatively impact their health and life span/quality.

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying too. On one hand you have typically healthy dogs with decent lifespans and long careers. Which says that they don't break down, if you have a dog who is living but crippled and ill they don't have a great quality of life, if they are still going strong true longevity.

Then you have DDK9s/Hulk who want to go bigger for the sake of it, have the dogs overweight and use an inclusion of Bully blood (more prone to health issues) that they are probably going to end up with lesser quality dogs. Yet people are spending a ridiculous amount for a puppy. Hopefully they have money for the possible vet bills.

Esand said:

Average is just that, an average, lots of individual dogs live longer, and many die earlier. Hopefully you'll have your dog around for a good while longer.

The statistics are crystal clear though, larger dogs live shorter lives.

Click to expand...

I know what an average is, it gives you a guideline and I'm hoping she lives beyond. I hate losing dogs, when they start to get older I start thinking about it.

Yes larger dogs in general live shorter lifespans but there is a variance between breeds and such. Dependant on if there are major health issues or not. We have no control over the genetic lottery that can be a win or lose. To the dogs of the subject of the foundation dog had a good lifespan, you don't see life threatening health problems that's a good sign.