Pitbull attacks son of Pittsburgh Steeler
Submitted by NFL Football Blog
Written by Black Entertainment USA
It’s sad news on any day when you hear that a child has been injured. That doesn’t change where the child has a parent that is famous or not. Because we all want children, anyone’s child, to be safe at all times.
But there is something in this story that infuriates me. The source of the injury to Pittsburgh Steeler’s linebacker James Harrison’s child was a pitbull dog. And I’ve heard these kinds of stories way to often. The breed should never be around children. In fact, I believe the entire breed should be destroyed.
But before I go on, let’s get this into perspective. The pitbull is NOT part of dogfighting. The dog was not abused, or mistreated. There have been no reports of the dog causing trouble, or getting loose, or anything that would indicate it would harm anyone. This is not a Michael Vick kind of situation. This is all about the breed.
Pitbulls are a breed of dog bred for one thing, fighting. They are known for their aggressiveness, and the injuries they give to adults as well as other dogs and animals. They are prone to sudden vicious attacks, without cause. In my experience, every pitbull will at some point turn and attack without cause at some point in their lives. And the manner of raising the pitbull, and it’s parentage have little to do with that.
Case in point, back in the mid-90’s I was working at a stock brokerage firm in NYC near Wall Street. In the middle of one day a call came in that the daughter of one of the brokers I knew had just been taken to the hospital. The cause of her injuries was the one of the family’s pitbulls.
This pitbull had been raised with the child from birth. It was bred as a family dog, and the broker was a recognized breeder. All of his dogs were raised in a gentle surrounding, with good bloodlines. Up to that point there had never been an incident with the dog. The attack occurred in the kitchen, with the mother and a family friend present.
The little girl was just 6 years old. The dog was 5. For no apparent reason the dog turned on the girl as she entered the kitchen. It bit her face, requiring plastic surgery though she face would always retain marks from the attack. But at least she survived.
Just as James Harrison’s son will survive. He was bit in the leg. He will be in a hospital for at least another day, as the injury is considered severe but not life threatening. Just as with the experience my broker acquaintence learned about, Harrison’s dog attacked without provocation. 2 adults, one being the mother of James, were also injured while trying to rescue the boy.
Why do people continue to have these animals? Especially around children? I just don’t understand it.
They are beasts at the best of times. They are popular because drug dealers in the 80’s used them to protect crack houses from police raids. They serve no purpose, and are without any merit in my opinion.
How many children will need to suffer from attacks by these beasts before they are destroyed? How many people will be attacked? How many more headlines will it take before the status of owning such a vicious and unpredictable creature fades?
Owning a pitbull leaves you with one result. Given time it is bound to attack. I’ve found that to be true in every case of someone owning a pitbull. And sadly, children often are the victim of these attacks.
Canada, Australia, England, Norway, France, Singapore, Iceland and even Serbia get it. They all restrict or forbid the breed. Various cities and counties across the nation including Sioux City, Overland Park, Miami-Dade, Youngstown, and Sparta among many others get it. Even the state of Oklahoma has proposed the ban of these dogs.
I am sorry to hear of the injury to Steeler’s linbacker Harrison’s child. But I hope that if any positive can come out of this horrific attack, it is that it helps to end the existence of this breed so that no other child ever goes through this again.
May 31st, 2009 at 12:37 pm
I want to first off state that I respect your opinion. However, if the future owners of a pitbull decided to do a little dog 101 research they would find that pitbulls take a certain kind of owner. They are more dominant than most breeds but there are specific guidelines to raising and training them. I am not stating that every attack that has occurred is strictly the owners fault because everything has its exceptions. I know several people that have been bitten by a dog in the face while they were children and none of the dogs were pitbulls. I just feel that if we were to eliminate this breed the reasoning would be all wrong. I don’t think it is all the dogs fault. Especially with children in the household or the possibility of them being an eventual part of the household future pitbull owners need to pay more attention to what breeds need certain treatments. Just like humans, we are all different and respond differently to situations. I appreciate your time and I hope you have the ability to come down from your original “destroy the breed” theory. People just need to have a better understanding of what they are getting into and pay more attention how certain breeds need to be treated. thanks again
Dave
June 5th, 2009 at 12:44 am
I stumbled across this and decided I just couldn’t pass it up without commenting. Yes, it is truly sad when someone, especially a child, gets injured. Yes, it is also very sad when the cause is a pet, but I find this article absolutely ludacris that you could write such a strong opinion on Pits. Have you ever owned one or raised one? I don’t think until you actually know all about the breed that you should sit here and state how terrible and beastly these animals are. I have had pits all of my life and look, I’m still here and have still not had any kind of trouble with them, AT ALL. I’m assuming you don’t know many people with Pits seeing as though everyone you know that has or has had one has gone through the dog snapping for no apparent reason. This article is ludacris and just another poorly researched conclusion on an already wrongly named breed.
June 5th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
This stories should be analyzed by a dog specialist, not by someone who had a friend who had a dog who bit someone.
All dogs respect dog pack hierarchy. It must be checked if it was taught the dog that the children at home were above him in the hierarchy.
Dogs usually bit each other in the face to teach respect to the hierarchy. But in a human it hurts. All you have to do is to be a responsible owner, learn everything is known about dog behavior and communicate well w/ your dog, teaching who is the leader and establishing boundaries while fullfulling his needs of mental and physical exercise and stress release.
June 8th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Audra,
You may have difficulty with the position I hold - as many pitbull lovers do - but there are at least as many, if not more that disagree with your opinion.
I’m glad nothing has happened with your pitbulls yet. The operative word is yet. In my experience and observations, the only factor is time. And that is based on many people with pitbulls, research wiich is included in this article, and yes my opinion.
If you think that the factual history of the origination of the pitbull breed is incorrect, I advise you to do your own reasearch and show me where I was wrong in what I found. If you think the research I did on the states, cities, and counties that have laws against pitbulls is incorrect I again ask you to do the research to show me where I am wrong.
Based on the multitude of ordinances against this breed, it’s history, my first-hand observations, and second-hand conversations, I stand firm on my conclusion about the breed. Even if you dislike that conclusion.
June 8th, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Marcus,
I suggest you re-read my post. While I am no specialist I believe the various cities, counties, and States I mentioned all do have specialists. So my opinion is not that far from what a specialist believes.
Also, while dog behavior may include actions as you suggest, such is not an excuse for what happened. As I stated in the post, this was not an attack on the face of the Steeler’s child, but the leg. To all information present, the owner is a responsible one. As was the stockbroker I mentioned in my example.
I again state that the unprovoked actions of the breed, tend to always be the most severe and violent of dog attacks. They are a breed created solely to fight, and are unreliable for any other purpose at best. There are always exceptions, but the outcry would not be so extreme, from so many sources, over so much time, were there not just cause.
Some may love this breed. But I take that to be similar to some people enjoying cutting themselves. I don’t agree with it, I have an opinion against it, I am vocal about my opinion. But some will still love it all the same.
June 8th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Admin,
US has many specialists for everything you can imagine, but still they went to war in Iraq, they delayed the fight against global warming, they handled Katrina ridiculously badly, they negleted alternative energy solutions and electric/hybrid car.
As a specialist myself, Physics PhD by UT Austin, I recognize there is a big barrier to get our message across for the common good. Don’t mistake yourself thinking that political decisions are taken based on proper specialized studies, even at city ordinance level.
As you know, Little Rascal’s dog was a pit bull and this shows that there are families of common people breeding pit bulls as family pet for more than 60 years. In genetic terms it is more than enough to define new standards in terms of personality in any breed.
I recommend you amuse yourself a bit with Dog Whisperer and get all the examples, counter-examples and references you need.
Your vocalization will not turn you in to a specialist and neither give any significance to your opinions. Only the wisdom acquired by a diligent study can. Then you will be able to convince me and many others. Good luck and best regards.
June 9th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
I’ve owned,raised,and bred pitbulls since 1980 without a single incident. Further, I know quite a few breeders who have been involved with the breed at least as long as I have without incident.
June 10th, 2009 at 2:59 am
Marcus,
I wrote the post in question, and responded to your comment. While it appeared as the Admin, it is in fact Michael Vass and not related to 1800blogger. I just want to clarify that as a point of fact.
Seperate of that, I never said I was a specialist in dogs. Nor do I intend on becoming one. And of course specialists can be wrong, they are human.
But, I believe that when a preponderance of evidence exists, along with multiple authorities, there tends to be a reason. Even when politics are concerned. Don’t make the mistake of thinking everything involved with a governmental body of whatever size must be wrong.
If I were to just take your logic stance then I am left with the thought that all specialists, including yourself, are generally wrong. Or that because so many specialists claim that global warming exists, and are politically active, that it must be wrong.
Either a large number of professionals all stating and acting in the same manner tends to be more right than wrong, or a good many issues of the day are completely bollox.
Also, examples of good or bad dogs are easy to find. Experiences of a small group of people can be similar. But I still state that when laws are enacted it is for the public good more often than not. Your isolated examples, and the best wishes of those that love the breed, cannot sway this fact.
Thus I do not need, nor have I tried, to sway your beliefs. I expressed my own. And I have defended my reasoning where it has been challenged. If you don’t like that, so be it. If you want to change my opinion give me hard facts and documented sources, plus your opinion. Prove to me, and the States, Counties, and Cities in this nation as well as others around the world, why the consensus is wrong - not conjecture but proof.
Until then I will continue to stand by the facts that are documented, and the expereinces I and others I know have had.
June 10th, 2009 at 7:27 am
Dear Michael,
First of all, there are no consensus. Most cities in US and around the world don’t adopt such restrictions.
Second, specialist can be politically engaged, but politicians should not disagree with top specialists in their area of expertise. To cite a few examples, 3-4 days before Katrina hit N.O., specialist from Disaster Res. Center said that N.O. should be evacuated. U.N. specialists said they searched and didn’t find any W.M.D. in Iraq, Paul krugman, Nobel Laureate, Prof. at Princeton Univ. , gave a talk at UT Austin in 2004, saying economy crash would happen anytime, because the conditions were created (excessive credit), Dr. James hansen, NASA researcher on climate has been going to Congress since 1988 to talk about climate change.
So, top specialists haven’t been wrong at all in most issues and I doubt mayors and city councils have been consulting specialists in dog behavior.
At last it is very easy to show that your conjectures are wrong. To prove an statement is wrong you only have to show one single example. Your statements were:
“They are a breed created solely to fight”- not true, see counter examples above and Little Rascal’s dog, where people created them as family pet.
“…and are unreliable for any other purpose at best”- not true, see Mark’s comment where he raise them since 1980’s.
I have already proved that the States have been wrong in many issues. So you shouldn’t take States or cities or counties as a ground for your statements.
As documented sources, I point to Cesar Millan’s books that documents well his sources.
All right! That’s the way specialists do, working w/ reason and logic, w/out making unfounded claims.
So now it is your time to do your homework, read the documented source and stop making empty claims easily refutable. You will give much more power to your blog and gain the trust of many readers.
Best regards.
June 10th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Marcus,
This is getting to be a flame war, so I will leave this on this note.
Look up the history of the pitbull breed. It is factual and not conjecture that they were bred for dogfighting.
Again, I can and the media has shown as many examples of this breed of dog being a danger as you can that it may not be. In addition I have provided proof of communities that have come to the same conclusion (in varying degrees) as I have. Thus my claims have foundation in logic, law, and documentation.
You have failed to provide proof of your claims. You have given opinion. Which I respect but disbelieve. Thus I stand firm on my opinion. The breed should be destroyed.
I have no further need to continue this as I have made my points clearly more than enough times.
June 12th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
that is so very sad i hope she is ok what happened to the pitbull
June 17th, 2009 at 2:37 am
You say that communities have come up with the same solution as you. That doesn’t mean much when there are WAY more communities in this world that don’t have the same restrictions on the breed. And if you want to talk about consensus, just look at this page because you don’t have anyone on the same side as you.
You’re blocking out any counter arguments that are coming your way.
June 17th, 2009 at 3:31 am
Samantha,
First, no opinion that avoids vulgarity or racist commentary is ever withheld or refused on any blog that I work on or own. Every comment that has appeared on this issue has been posted.
Second, The fact that there have been a few vocal supporters of pitbulls responding to my post does not sway my opinion. I respect their opinions, but I am not moved by them.
And while there are currently more communities without restrictions on pitbulls, that trend is diminishing. Thankfully.
Oh, for clarification, my solution is extermination of the breed. So most communities are far more gentle in their restrictions. Though the fact that the breed is seen as a danger is in line with my view.
Tahj123,
Generally any animal that attacks a human and draws blood is destroyed to my knowledge. I expect that is what has happened to this pitbull, but I may be wrong.
June 18th, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Admin,
Thought I agree with you partially that Pit bulls have their aggressive side to their breed, however, they can also be great pets as well. When you use the term “extermination of the breed” so loosely, it almost sounds as though your the next Hitler. How can you say so freely to destroy a breed? There are amazonian tribes that are born and trained to kill on site of any foreign tribesmen, though their practices seem inhumane, but should they be destroyed or exterminated? The answer is NO because they are in fact human and trained or taught wrongly (though their teachings and traditions should not be judged upon by me or others). The same goes for Pit Bulls, because of numbers of incidents, you decide that a potential loving dog should be eradicated? That seems to be a very harsh conclusion to a very Hitler like view.
I am not trying to deny the fact that Pit Bulls can be rather aggressive and dominant, but under correct supervision and training, they can become the ideal dog for any family. Though there might be incident that arise with a so-called trained Pit Bull, their are tons and tons of incidents with various other trained breeds as well. Perhaps your conclusion with the eradication of Pit Bulls, may also lead to the eradication of German Shepherds, Bull Dogs, Huskies or any other breed that has had incidents in the past.
Best of luck in a world where extermination of any living animal/human is frowned upon. And I really hope your Hitler like view changes…
Best Regards,
Tom
June 18th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
“Owning a pitbull leaves you with one result. Given time it is bound to attack. I’ve found that to be true in every case of someone owning a pitbull. And sadly, children often are the victim of these attacks.” This is so ill-informed. Since pitbulls are basically everywhere, how come there aren’t more stories of attacks. The odds of you getting crushed by a vending machine are much higher. I think vending machines are far more vicious. If the blogger decided to do a little more research, you’d find that pit bulls used to be the most popular breed in America. They were considered the perfect family dog! Ever heard of ‘Our Gang’? Petey was a pit bull. Of course, that was when dogs were allowed to be dogs. Given the freedom to roam and get the exercise they needed. Instead, people who bring dogs into their homes, locked up most of the day, and not giving them enough exercise, are shocked when their dogs act out. Sure, pits are strong and powerful, but when treated responsibly, they are still the PERFECT DOG! Too bad the same can’t be said about you mis-informed bloggers…
June 18th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Howard,
Your comment, and view, as already been addressed in a seperate reply by me. I have no need to repeat it.
June 18th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Tom,
Wow. A comparison to Hitler. And people say I am reaching when I voice an opinion about a breed created solely for dogfighting. I know I’m on the extreme view of this breed, but Hitler?
I think you need to calm down a lot.
June 18th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
By the way. I notice that in all the calls to save these animals from my words, only 1 person so far has asked a word about the girl in the attack. Who to my knowledge is ok.
All these vocal and feverent lovers of pitbulls seem highly remiss in their concern for the human in this story.
If exterminating every single pitbull saves the life of a single child, I would do it. If you could give me an equally compelling arguement about another breed of animal, I probably would have the same opinion. But I am unaware of another breed that was created solely for their ability to be aggressive fighters.
I place people above animals. I like animals, but they are not the same to me. Don’t like that? Oh well. Want to call me Hitler for it, go right ahead.
But I have to believe that when such a small minority of people are so absolutely tunnel-visioned about a singular view, there must be some truth to it. Because all fanatics are wrong. That’s true of me, or any person that would place the life of an animal above a human being.
June 22nd, 2009 at 9:15 pm
The only thing I would like to say/ask of you is to take a look at this link, if you have not already. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_Bull
I understand and respect your point of view, your information is clear and well organized. but just as you responded to an earlier post I simply typed “pitbull” in an online search engine, wikipedia in this case, and this is the information i found.
information such as other uses and reasons pitbulls have been/are bred.
the laws concerning pitbull and their owners in the cities and countries you listed.
thank you, in advance, for your time.
June 23rd, 2009 at 2:06 am
Joe,
I have read that source, and it was one of the items I used in researching details found in my post.
July 9th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
You have to respect other opinions, however to destroy the pitbull breed would be impossible. The “pitbull” is not one breed but the name for 3 types of dogs of varying mixes. The APBT, Amstaff, Ambully. Secondly, if we are talking about a true American Pitbull Terrier, well they were breed for fighting BULLS. They are bred to be non-humane aggressive, because the owners had to be able to get the dog off of the bull it was attacking. APBTs scored higher even than golden retrievers on a behavioral test. Pitbull attacks make headlines..so if you have a lab mix or a mix of anything that could pass as a pitbull then its a pitbull. Unless someone has papers on the dog, or has both of the parents present and papered, how can anyone know the actual breed of the dog? You can make any dog vicious, even a tiny poodle, if you want. So which mix exactly is it that you would like to get rid of? Go back and research how the APBT was bred and maybe you will understand the breed better.
July 10th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Sarah,
I respect all opinions. But that does not requre me to agree. Or vice versa.
I first want to state that the child is ok now. Something that most defending the pitbulls have failed to be concerned with.
As for the history of the breed, you are incorrect. English Bulldogs were bred for bull fighting. Pitbulls were solely for dog fighting. While the 2 have similar ancestors, they are not the same breed.
As for their being 3 breeds viewed as pitbull, I am only aware of the American pit bull terrier. Though I believe that there is no offical pit bull breed (I may be wrong on that point). Still that does not change my opinion.
I am an extremist. I love dogs, and have owned several of various breeds. I value a human life above a dog. Especially if that life is a child. If destroying the breed save 1 child, I would do it.
That belief does place me in a category that I believe in strongly. That any extremist (fanatic) is always wrong. And I will submit that my view may well be wrong. But I will not move from it.
July 10th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Breeds/AmericanPitBullTerrierRevisedNovember12008
According to the ukc they were bred from these same bulldogs and used in American for catching wild cattle and hogs. They also note that the APBT is a good family dog. As I stated before, the just “pitbull” term encompasses a certain look of dog, not usually a specific breed. In the article you write to get your point across about a breed of dog. While I am sure everyone is happy to know the little girl will be ok, that is not the argument, and we are responding to the argument. Also, just because we want to inform people, that makes us extremist who have no regard for human life? That’s a little harsh in my opinion. I am open to everyone’s opinions, but there is no need to make assumptions.
July 13th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Sarah,
I called myself an extremist, though the same might apply to the comment calling me Hitler.
As for the young girl, she is an integral part of my post. Because it is the protection of all children that concerns me with this breed. It is the devastating and severe nature of this breeds attacks that makes them such a danger, especially to children. So yes, I do feel that her health is as important to the post and discussion as the future of this breed.
And as to the UKC
“Sometime during the nineteenth century, dog fanciers in England, Ireland and Scotland began to experiment with crosses between Bulldogs and Terriers, looking for a dog that combined the gameness of the terrier with the strength and athleticism of the Bulldog. The result was a dog that embodied all of the virtues attributed to great warriors: strength, indomitable courage, and gentleness with loved ones.”
At no point does this explain the purpose of creating the breed. Why did they need to be “great warriors”? For what purpose did they use the “strength and athleticism”? It is not discussed at all, just that after coming to America other additional uses were found for the dog. Which is not the same as refuting the fact that the breed was created for dogfighting.
Dogfighting was legal when this breed was created. Multiple sources state the reasons for the creation of the breed. But I am not surprised that the UKC, which does not advocate dogfighting, would bring up such a past. If for no reason other than to ensure that dog fighting is not even implicitly approved by them.
And by the way, just as a point of reference, what great warrior are you aware of that was known for their gentleness with loved ones - especially children? Since the pitbull is being compared to Ghengis Khan, Hannibal, Alexander the Great, and so on I really want to know the similarity with children.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Well written, relatively unbiased article. As an insurance adjuster I can tell you… I’d never own a Pit Bull, and I don’t even have children. Bad breed, regardless of what the zoomies say. Should at the very least be highly regulated. For the record, a responsible person might be able to control a pit, but a responsible person generally wouldn’t own a pit.