Moselle Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) And for the record, I am not offended by Michael Linke's statement as all he was stating is fact. No, Mr. Linke's statement was not based on fact. He is literally stating that a dog wrongly deemed to be a pitbull in the eyes of the public could, in turn, be in fact a staffie or a mastiff. So he is implying that staffies or the mastiff could be responsible for certain attacks and not the pitbull. This could serve to simply start an epidemic where the media will start looking down on the staffie or the mastiff. Not a good idea! Edited July 21, 2010 by Moselle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 No, Mr. Linke's statement was not based on fact. He is literally stating that a dog wrongly deemed to be a pitbull in the eyes of the public could, in turn, be in fact a staffie or a mastiff. So he is implying that staffies or the mastiff could be responsible for certain attacks and not the pitbull. Yes it is fact, and you have shown clearly that you agree with it. This could serve to simply start an epidemic where the media will start looking down on the staffie or the mastiff. This would appear to be your contention and you have a right to see it that way, but this is quite different to accusing him of saying something which is not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliversmum Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 You agree that most people cannot identify a Pitbull.You agree that more often than not the reports involving alleged Pitbulls are innacurate. Do you disagree that Mastiff breeds, Staffordshire BT's, and cross breeds are often mis identified as Pitbulls ? On occasion, I wouldnt be surprised if the odd individual may mistake a staffy for a pitbull but there hasnt been a furore over this, has there? No, I dont think that mastiffs are often mistaken for pitties. Crossbreeds mistaken for a pitbull? yes, quite likely. Moselle, This is where I stongly dispute your argument. My purebred has been mistaken for a pitty by someone who ovbiously has no idea of either breeds physical appearance. I understand what your trying to say, you are saying that simply by stating the other breeds that the offending dogs could have been is passing the buck so to speak onto other breeds other than the pitt bull. But, I say, why should the pitt bull breed get the finger pointed immediately at them when infact, not many people can correctly identify a pitt bull from a mixed breed - hell, in my experience, from another purebreed. I get it, but, I say it is not fair to immediately blame a pitt bull when infact no one can be sure what breed the dogs where. Gee, go and have a look at other threads where a Boston x Lab was confiscated from it's elderly owner because it was wrongly identified as a pitt bull!!! And for the record, I am not offended by Michael Linke's statement as all he was stating is fact. What breed is your purebreed dog? is it the one pictured on the avatar? I am glad that you actually understood what I have been trying to say and I agree totally, as I have said earlier, that most people have no real idea what a purebred pittie actually looks like. I so hate what had transpired in QLD with the wrong identification of dogs and the subsequent destruction of them simply because they were deemed to be "pitbulls." I also despise the fact that too many so-called "pitbulls" have been sent to their deaths through no wrong doing whatsoever! Even purebred pitbulls that have committed no crime have a right to live out their lives without being destroyed! Having said all this, I still maintain that mr. linke was trying to sway people's way of thinking much to the dismay of staffy or mastiff owners. My Breed is a South African Boerboel. Yes the one in the avatar, he was only 4 months old then. I get what your trying to say, I really do, but as far the media jumping on another breed, well, I think they never miss an opportunity any which way. Many, many years ago I used to breed Australian Cattle Dogs under the "Peppertree" prefix and way back then, there was plenty of bashing...trust me on that. Our resident favourite gardener made sure he had plenty to sprout about when it came to them. I understand where your coming from, I really do but I guess I just have a different opinion to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) This would appear to be your contention and you have a right to see it that way, but this is quite different to accusing him of saying something which is not true. Lo Pan, Mr. Linke has not seen the dogs responsible for the attack on the maltese. That is an even better reason for him not to make such blind assumptions. Is he basing this assumption on past attacks? Does he have actual data proving that dog attacks deemed to be carried out by pitbulls were in fact carried out by the staffie or the mastiff? He is trying to shift the blame on other breeds in order to protect his beloved pitbull. It is all fair and dandy in saying that people have no idea in properly identifying the pitbull, which is very true, but confusing the public at large into thinking that dogs perceived as pitbulls could in fact be staffies or mastiffs is simply not only WRONG but also DETRIMENTAL! Edited July 21, 2010 by Moselle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 And for the record, I am not offended by Michael Linke's statement as all he was stating is fact.No, Mr. Linke's statement was not based on fact. He is literally stating that a dog wrongly deemed to be a pitbull in the eyes of the public could, in turn, be in fact a staffie or a mastiff. So he is implying that staffies or the mastiff could be responsible for certain attacks and not the pitbull. This could serve to simply start an epidemic where the media will start looking down on the staffie or the mastiff. Not a good idea! They probably were some mongrel bred bull breed crosses or the "generic" Staffy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Sorry I feel that based on events to date it is more than reasonable to suggest that it is possible that the dogs involved in this particular attack may have been Mastiffs, Staffordshire BT's, or cross breeds. Its a fair bet that he does have evidence showing the Pitbulls are frequently misidentified and misreported. In the event he doesn't it would be awfully easy to collate some. Media watch do it all the time, i'd like to see them get around to this issue it will be laugh exposing how weak the basis of their never ending allegations are. but confusing the public at large into thinking that dogs perceived as pitbulls could in fact be staffies or mastiffs is simply not only WRONG but also DETRIMENTAL! Firstly its not wrong, and you agree. Second, It is not my view that he is confusing the public, it is my view that his aim is to educate the public not confuse them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Sorry I feel that based on events to date it is more than reasonable to suggest that it is possible that the dogs involved in this particular attack may have been Mastiffs, Staffordshire BT's, or cross breeds.Its a fair bet that he does have evidence showing the Pitbulls are frequently misidentified and misreported. In the event he doesn't it would be awfully easy to collate some. Media watch do it all the time, i'd like to see them get around to this issue it will be laugh exposing how weak the basis of their never ending allegations are. but confusing the public at large into thinking that dogs perceived as pitbulls could in fact be staffies or mastiffs is simply not only WRONG but also DETRIMENTAL! Firstly its not wrong, and you agree. Second, It is not my view that he is confusing the public, it is my view that his aim is to educate the public not confuse them. Yes, yes...let us educate the public that most dogs resembling pitbulls are in fact staffies or mastiffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 ... or cross breeds If I were to have one point of contention with what he said, it would be the use of the term "Mastiff". I think he is using it generically to mean all Mastiff breeds, including the Neo and Bull which is not an accurate use of the term. But by the commonly understood definition of Mastiff, to mean all Mastiff breeds, yes thats right, Mastiffs, Staffordshire's, and cross breeds whilst not exclusively the types of dogs accused of being Pitbulls make up a sizeable proportion, that is fact, if you oppose it then you support supressing facts. Alot of folks do take that approach. There is a strong case in support of the APBT and for the folly of BSL, there is no need for fantasy land here it only undermines us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MolassesLass Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Yes, yes...let us educate the public that most dogs resembling pitbulls are in fact staffies or mastiffs. How (very) dare you say I am fat and have grey hair! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curlybert Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 For those who may not know, this thread has taken a very entertaining turn as a new thread under "General Dog Discussion"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve11 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I'm in perth, so I don't know who this Mr Linke is, but I read what he said to mean, people are always jumping to the assumption it is a pitbull, when it could have been any number of dogs that look very similar....I personally honestly believe it doesn't matter what sort of dog you have, it is about the way it is raised for the most part.... I believe some people get a pitbull for the name and they want an agressive dog, and its these people that have given the breed a terrible name... I would also like to say, I have known pitbulls that are the most placid dogs I have ever seen, I have also known a maltese, that most people couldnt get near for fear of losing a finger, and other dogs well.... very agressive anyway thats my 2 pennys :-) I agree totally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akayla Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Anyone listen to the audio interview rather than just read text? I think you can quite easily gather his meaning and it is just a general reference that it could have been another breed. I also think the interview I heard on the radio was also longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keetamouse Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) * Edited July 21, 2010 by keetamouse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keetamouse Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Mr Linke could have easily said it could have been a Chihuahua/Malt/foxie...... now that would make an interesting discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MolassesLass Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Yes, yes...let us educate the public that most dogs resembling pitbulls are in fact staffies or mastiffs. How (very) dare you say I am fat and have grey hair! Nope, I tried it but I just can't see the satisfaction in making up what other people say and then getting mad about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyla Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 They could have been Labradors for all we know. I have pedigree Labs, and I have been asked by several people if my male is crossed with a mastiff because he has a broad masculine head, and is bigger than the girls. If people can't pick a Labrador, what hope is there accurately identifying other breeds? I personally honestly believe it doesn't matter what sort of dog you have, it is about the way it is raised for the most part.... I believe some people get a pitbull for the name and they want an agressive dog, and its these people that have given the breed a terrible name...I would also like to say, I have known pitbulls that are the most placid dogs I have ever seen, I have also known a maltese, that most people couldnt get near for fear of losing a finger, and other dogs well.... very agressive anyway thats my 2 pennys :-) Agree! The most aggressive dogs I have personally come across are the small fluffies who were "too cute and fragile" to discipline as pups, and turned out to be aggressive and bitey. Is it the dogs fault? I would think most of the blame comes back to the owner, and the lack of boundaries and guidance given to the dog in its early days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 For those who may not know, this thread has taken a very entertaining turn as a new thread under "General Dog Discussion"! Oh thank you for directing posters to the other thread; join the popularity queu please. . I thought that it was blunty clear that the reason I started the thread under "general dog discussion" is simpy because it would generate more attention there and most posters who participate under "general dog discussion" don't often come to the "News" section of DOL. It has certainly been most entertaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Well, the two dogs that were taken to DAS for the ID parade were not picked out by the victim as the offending dogs. So, either the carer/owner of the dogs was very mistaken about their potential or the victim really didn't get a good enough look, wasn't sure enough, has embellished their memory about what the dogs look like, or, quite possibly, there actually are two other dogs in the general vicinity that fit the description he provided but nobody else has seen them or is going to own up that they have them. Hmmmm. I know which scenario makes the most sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottnBullies Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Purebred pitbulls aren't common around here. Not to mention 2 black ones.....which would be even less common Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussienot Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 The words 'Pit Bull' stopped meaning any actual breed or cross breed in the media long ago. To the media and to some of the public, EVERY dog that attacks is a 'Pit Bull'. Regardless of size, head shape, colour or genetic form. Perhaps the owners of that great breed should consider a name change for the breed, and leave 'Pit Bull' as media shorthand for 'bad dog'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now