Ruined??

Lovebeingme, I wonder why you skipped over replying to my invitation. Here it is again for you to read.

Now, I will reply to your other point.

Like stated before, dogs have the choice to start or not to start, continue or not continue, finish or not to finish. The dogs do not know of the consequences if they choose not to perform as bred. Culling is a fact of life in ALL purpose-bred animals. If the milk cow does not produce milk, it is culled. If the egg hatching chicken does not produce eggs, it is culled. This breed was NEVER created for the unique purpose of resting in couch with lazy owner.

I am trying to read between your sentences to gain a better perspective of what bothers you about the beautiful sport of dog matching. As long as you are receptive to reason, we can continue on this debate. Otherwise, posting will become an exercise of futility.

Here are some facts regarding dog matching pre-1976 and present where legal. About 70% do not last more than an hour. Most contests end before injuries reach a level where life is in risk. In fact, between average-mouth opponents, injuries remain superficial even when match last longer than 1 hour. It is a fact that dogs will quit sooner out of fatigue than injury. In addition, proper aftercare is standard practice in all professional matches.

Your second point was the "sickness" of continuous matching of the winner of said bout. Well, unlike with human boxing careers (as example), these dogs are rarely matched more than three times. In fact, it is common to have 1xwinners retired to stud. The point of matching was to test a breeding program against another breeding program. The result lead to adjustments to said program which in itself leads to better dogs being created.

In essence, culling by death is a necessary evil to assure preservation of the breed.

I am sorry but our dogs (breed) is NOT history. They are here and now and will remain to be. This breed has an unchanging standard. Those that truly love the breed will continue to breed to standard. Since 2007 does not bring an indication that human "blood" sports are going to be banned, why give emphasis on dog matching?

While there may be some ego in human combating sport participants, they began in the sport for the love of it. In dog matching, dogs willingly participate in proving superiority over another. These dogs are NOT taught to fight other dogs. Either they eventually "turn on" or they do not have the natural desire to combat. Here we choose from those that WILLINGLY and NATURALLY seek to perform as bred. These dogs, after proven their breeding, live to breed to as many bitches as possible. If only human athletes were as lucky :cool:

Lovebeingme, I respect your opinion and hope you can back them up. I realize some of our members have a less than tactful method of representing themselves. I apologize on their behalf.

 

First of all it's Jaime, not Jamine. :p

Second, I don't let my dogs outside unattended, also there is no hole in the fence. Therefor there is no way any of my dogs would get into it with a next door neighbors dog.

Sure, a dog is displaying freewill if they are left unattended and choose to battle. The point is, it is our responsibility as responsible owners to never let our dogs be subject to such a situation.

I understand that some of these dogs want to fight, I have admitted that earlier in this thread, I just don't allow that behavior in my home, and try my damndest to stop ANY aggression.

You say "A special kind of working-dog will vanish if you dont care about his genetic-task." My point is, there is no legal outlet for this work, if you want a hog aggressive dog fine, then breed for that, but dog on dog aggression is not something that flies in this day and age.

You say "The dog dont has to win in the box....its enough if he dont give up, then he is proven, thats all a dogman want to see and believe me many times you can see a dogman cry in a match so true dogman speak of sweat and tears to pay for a good kennel" My point, again, is what is the ultimate point? You cannot legally fight dogs. And what does "not give up" really mean? What if neither dog gives up??? What if their dog does give up? From the words of an "old timer" earlier in this thread that means the dog dies, dirt nap, sees the other end of a barrel. Yeah, freewill. So dogmen cry when their dogs lose, big surprise, to them they have wasted time and money on a dog they now think is a waste. Either way the dog loses. They pay the ultimate price.

You say "You think in our kind of civilization there is no place for this kind of selection and that is a bad mistake because only a short step forward and this civilization will be washed away....and then we need exactly this kind of dogs." I say "what?"

Jaime

 

I have no clue what this means but I imagine it's not a very nice statement about me.

I love you too Attila.....

 

What does loving myself have to do with not aggreeing of some of your opinions? To me, those are two totally different things.

Jaime

 

It had nothing to do with you, no fear. He basically said that realonebulldog made a great statement.

 

Earlier in this thread it was made clear to me that a dog culled for not performing in the ring meant that the dog "no longer existed" that the dog was killed. If some of you alter and rehome dogs that do not perform to your liking bravo to you. I like that alternative much better than the other.

If I seem uninformed, it may be in part due to the conflicting things I have read this far on this site.

You say "
There is no reasoning there & the dog is in no way whatsoever aware of any consequences of standing the line. Since the dog is not aware in any way of the consequences of it's choice, it cannot be forced & that only leaves the dog w/ complete freedom of will. "

My point is whether or not the dog wants to fight, it is our responsibility as owners to not allow our dogs to be physically harmed. To me, pain is not something I want my dog to experience. My point about the freewill issue was more about what happens to the dog whether they win, lose, or back down. Maybe freewill is the wrong term for what I am trying to get at. It just seems that if your choices are pain and injury, or death, neither seem very favorable.


If you admit "As for dogs wanting to be in the house, yes, dogs want to be in the house. I chain & rotate & almost all my guys will run you over to get in the house. It's the nature they inherited from the wolf. They want to be where their pack is & due to the nature of the breed their pack is not canine, but human. So where humans are, the pit bull wants to be also"

Why deprive your dogs of this? To me, this is the problem I have with chaining a pit bull. They love their humans and want to be near them, depriving them of that seems cruel to ME.

"But I will say this - I am very impressed w/ the fact you stayed around & continued a dialogue, even w/ those who were tough on you. That shows a willingness to learn on your part, or a least a willingness to teach, even if your lesson matter was a bit off the mark!"

My Fiance keeps asking why I continue to post on a site where everyone hates me. I like to think atleast a few of you can tolerate me, lol. I keep posting because I feel the need to keep talking.

Again, thanks for having me, and atleast allowing me to continue with my rants, I'm sure eventually it will get old again and you all will wish me dead, but it was a fun ride none the less.

Jaime

 

Obviously you are too heated to try and calmly explain exactly what is it you are saying. Can someone else please let me know, thanks.

What "crazy ass parrallels" have I drawn? What does that even mean?

What type of character am I to you, again, you are typing, but not really saying anything.

How is my experience limited? If 10 years with the breed is not enough, what is? At what point am I allowed to express my feeling and explain my experiences? 20 years, 30? Do you make that decision?

You wouldn't place a rescue with me huh? Are you even involved in rescue?

If your last statement was an attempt at a joke, it failed terribly....back to the drawing board my friend.

Jaime

 

Jaime stick around if you really love the breed they have really tough skin and so should you

It takes all kinds to make the world turn Lol

 

Please explain what part of my post is humanizing my dogs. The part where I express that they feel pain? Last I checked they have nerve endings and can feel pain, that's an animal thing, not solely human.

If you are going to continue to berate me and my posts please try and add some more meat to them, some logic might help as well.

Jaime

 

The point was already made that these dogs want to be with their humans. They make wonderful pets by the way. If you are not aware of that it may be you who only knows half of what you think you do.

Did you ever consider that we are coming from somwhere totally different, can you not understand that? I love these dogs. I devote every day to them, and you tell me I am not worthy.

AGAIN! What in my post was humanizing these animals? You really need some back up for statements like these.

Sorry, losing my cool a bit guys. *takes a deep breath*


Jaime

 

In all honesty I have never seen Free Willy, so I have no comment.

Jaime

 

"Well, you are wrong" In your eyes, and that's fine. The bottom line for me is I would NEVER purposely let my dogs be harmed in ANY way. I am their protecter, and to me, that means not allowing them into situations where they may experience pain....even if they want to engage in that behavior.

"Humans don't come from breeding programs, and they are certainly not forced into it, it's just enjoyable for some" ACK! This is what makes my stomach churn. The reason I typed about the dog fight in my house was to try and explain how horrific the experience was for me. I cannot in any way shape or form understand how someone can ENJOY watching it. I have suffered some serious after effects from that day, and I can't imagine just standing idly by and watching. Just a reminder.....that's my opinion.

Personally I think racing horses is cruel. That might be another 20 page thread though so let's let that one be.

Jaime

 

Why can't a dog live indoors and still get the exercise it needs? Why is her "normal" routine better than living in a home?

Well I guess I'm not many people. I do not think of my dogs as children, they are dogs. Nor do they act like spoiled children. They are well behaved dogs who know the rules, they just happen to be able to be in the house, where they want to be apparently.

Jaime

 

I read your second post on this thread and I will admit, I did not originally respond to this one as I knew it was going to take me a long time and I was being lazy.

I will attempt it now though..

"Let us start from the beginning. The ancestors of dogs were domesticated and later bred with specific purpose(s) in mind. Fast-forwarding a few hundred years, dogs breeds were all working breeds. This meant that only those dogs who work appropriately remain in the breeding program with all others being culled (killed). Fast-forwarding a few more hundred years, the notion of lap dogs was introduced by "royalty". These dogs were not intended to do anything but look pretty. These dogs were bred for entertainment purposes.

Today, we have working and non-working breeds. In other words, dogs bred to work and dogs bred to do nothing. working breeds requires each member to do its job or be culled in order to maintain breed integrity. The non-working breeds do not have this requirement which lead to deformities and health ailments (i.e English Bulldog). The difference in these types of dogs is apparent in their overall health and temperament. "up to standard" relates to a gauge or measurement given via a test directly (as much as possible) related to the work of the breed. It makes sense to cull those individuals not up to par the same way it makes sense to fire a person unable to properly do its job."

Although I already know the basic history of the dog I do appreciate you going into such detail. Thanks.

"Now, let us look into the original purpose of the American Pit Bull Terrier. The working purpose of this breed is to engage without hesitation and remain in its task until it is completed. A dog conditioned by outside stimuli to halt, hesitate, or straight up stop, has been ruined or has been unmasked as an unworthy member of its working breed. In other words, it is a dud in a pack of bullets (lol). Thus, it is the responsibility of the breeder to dispose of duds. It is irresponsible to give and worst to sell these mutts to the Larrys and Moes of society. Unfortunately, since 1976, that is exactly what has been happening in most societies around the USA. Looking at the so-call "pit bull" today, John and Jane Smith have created a different standard for our breed. How dare they try to change what has been standardize for over 100 years?"

I understand the ORIGINAL purpose of the APBT. I can appreciate why someone would want a dog who completes a task without hesitation. Although, I don't see why said dog would not be worthy of being put into a home as a pet. Especially a breed that is so devoted to it's humans.
I don't see it as John and Jane trying to destroy or change the breed, I see it as a need to adapt to changing times.


My post was too long...the remainder I will post shortly.

Jaime

 

"Now, let us look into the sport of dog matching. Once again, I state not violating the 1976 act. I am utilizing my 1st amendment right to state my stand on this beautiful professional sport. Humans have been combating other humans since forever. At some point in our development, we started to organize ourselves and utilized organized combat for entertainment. This organization and reorganization of the combating sports developed into what we have today. In today's societies we have boxing, MMA, K-1, Wrestling, Martial arts, etc. All of these sports are accepted in most modern (and non extremist) societies. All of the people into these sports are willing participants. In addition, all of these sports carry an innate degree of danger of personal injury. In fact, there is a high degree of certainty a participant WILL be physically injured at some point. Yet, when two animals have been purposely bred to excel in this task, it is inhumane? This does not make sense to me. We as humans can beat ourselves into the floor but two willing and specialized animals cannot do the same? Yes, i do mean animals since there are many other animals used for the same task. Some examples of other animals bred/utilized for this purpose are fish, roosters, praying manthis. What makes dog matching any worst than any human sport where there is an acceptable degree of injury and/or permanent incapacitation?"

First, the fact that you call it beautiful makes my stomach turn (just my opinion and feelings).
Second, I have been accused of humanizing my dogs, but your post is absolutely humanizing them. To me, there is no comparison between human fight sports and animal fight sports. We are supposed to be the intelligent species, we can think and make decisions. When you purposely breed and encourage dog on dog aggression you as a human are influencing their behavior. It is inhumane because they do not have reasoning skills. They do not have the brain capability to think, "hey, this is going to hurt, and I might actually die."

The word "entertainment" in your post is sickening to me. If you must be entertained by fighting, do it yourself. Get in that ring with another man and duke it out. Don't subject an animal to harm and pain because you want to be entertained.

I was not aware that fish were bred to fight, that's weird, and for the record, I am against cock fighting.

 

"The real problem, humane organizations and their Media goonies that somehow developed the belief that animal is more important than human. Please do not get me wrong, I abhor cruelty to animals. While many of these organizations do good for most animals, they are number one enemy of our breed. Their objective with this breed is total extinction. I have a hard time believing most of them naive. They should know and understand the differences between animal and human aggression. An animal may be aggressive toward animals and be loving toward humans. On the other hand, an animal may be loving toward all animals but vicious toward humans. Yet, neither the humaniacs nor their Media counterparts make this distinction known to the public. Rather, they developed and advertised street dogger instructions. I am sure you have heard of feeding gun powder, tabasco sauce, tied dogs used to train another, etc, etc. All of these myths have been advertised by the Media and organizations such as PeTA and SPCA. In addition, they make it seem like these dogs are being malnourished and uncared for. Fact is that these dogs are fed much better than most pet dogs. Fact is that these dogs are attended no worse than any other combating human after a match. If you look at historical pictures of these athletes, you will learn how well there were cared."

I will agree about the media, but not MOST humane organizations. I work closely with a few and believe me, they are not trying to kill off all the pit bulls. They are desperately looking for a solution. They are constricted by local law, and torn emotionally about what to do with these dogs. Most times, rescue is the only option, and with pit rescues being very few and far between, most dogs die. This is NOT because they want them dead, this is because of lack of options. So sad.

In my experiences, we don't think that dogs are more important than humans, just that they deserve a voice.

So let me get this right....rescue groups are the number one enemy for the breed? Are you kidding me? The people invloved in my rescue know that dog aggression is to be expected. The only time we euthanize a dog is for either medical or human aggression. That is harming the breed?

Again, I TOTALLY agree about the media and PETA. I am constantly sending emails and letters trying to make the stupid understand what is happening, sometimes it works....sometimes it doesn't.'Thus, in conclusion, shells of these dogs are now in the public's hand. That does not infer they are true to standard. We, fanciers of the true-to-form APBT know that to keep the integrity of the breed, culling is an essential factor. It is impossible to retain integrity without having control."Shells of the dogs or not, they are still living breathing beings that deserve a chance (with no HA of course). It is what it is. We all need to move on.

Jaime

 

Great Post!!! Love this thread. It is really informative.

I am fairly new to this site. But I have learned so much. I grew up with APBT but they were my dad's dogs. I just knew them as pets. I too was a person that was disgusted with the whole fighting aspect. I even did my ethics report in school (Vet Tech) on dog fighting. But I fell victim to the whole media and animal rights activists therories. Also all the BS that is pushed in our faces about dog fighters (usually punks that are like "my dog can kill your dog" Then animal control finds a burned dog on the side of the road) Not the true dogmen and what they stood for. It wasn't until I was sat down by a friend and explained the truth. I respect the past that made these dogs what they are. I also see that these dogs do want to do what they have been bred to do. It is that heart that makes them who they are and why alot of ppl love this breed.

 

A dog can live indoors and get exercise, but dogs need "normal". In this case her normal is outdoors in a kennel, the house is a bonus treat which she gets routinely.. Dogs need routine. I never said that living in a home wasn't the answer, just that she needed normal to help with recovery. And come on if she has been in the house, only outside for bathroom duties (on a chain) I'd say she wasn't getting alot of exercise, right? Out in her kennel she can regulate what her body can handle, exercise wise.

I agree you must not be "many people", that is absolute great. I applaud you. Of course they want to be in the house, thats not a bad thing if that is how they are normally.

I have a house dog myself, but other dogs that are outside. Yeah, they like to be in the house, but usually are ready to go back out after a few days, but maybe thats just my dogs.

And by the way.. I wasn't trying to imply that you were one of those "many people" was just stating a general opinion.

 

Okay, I can agree that her normal is outside. I won't deny, though, I'd like to see her curled up on the couch. Just my personal preference I suppose. Thanks for clarifying what you meant in your post. I hope I wasn't too on the defensive. I have felt a bit attacked, and may have been too harsh in some of my comments. If I did, I apologize.

Jaime

 

some of this thread is really amusing,,,,as for as molester need to be strung up in public and tortured till they pass,,,,,,,

now for as dogs go,,, dogs no matter how you want to look at it is not to be compared to humans,,,ppl wine and cry about dogs and yards till the authorities come in and lock them in a little cage for 6 months and end up putting hem down,,,a pit bull was breed to have aggression and will display it,,,as far as dogs being rolled,, if it's not urs then mind your business,,, and culled,,, you cull dogs to keep them out of idiots hands and it keeps the attention off what your doing... it's okay for the state to kill dogs but god forbid you cull one,,,, come on suck it up and quit being a sissy