New York woman arrested after Pit Bull attack.

[Omegaman 3.0]

Boa Constrictors? You would not have one because of all the deaths of children due to them? According to the humane society, there have been 17 deaths in the U.S. due to constrictor snake incidents since 1978. You do realize that is one death, every three years, for people of all ages, for all constrictors, not just children and boa constrictors, right? And you think that the Pitbull gets a bad, undeserved rep, because they kill  80 times more often. Do you find that to be rational? Just asking.

You also said there is nothing wrong with buying a Pitbull. I am not going to make a moral judgement about purchasing Pitbulls. I was just suggesting that people do not buy them (never said to not aquire one), because I think the sooner we remove the monetary reward from the picture, the faster the population of Pitbulls with shrink, making the world a safer place for people and pets.

In any case, I think I have made my points, presented my case, and I doubt I can add anything that would make it stronger. So, I see no need to continue participation. There are other threads that are more important, like "Is it just me", so I leave those who wish to continue here, free to do so, have fun! Bye all!

[Qnts2]

Boa Constrictors? You would not have one because of all the deaths of children due to them? According to the humane society, there have been 17 deaths in the U.S. due to constrictor snake incidents since 1978. You do realize that is one death, every three years, for people of all ages, for all constrictors, not just children and boa constrictors, right? And you think that the Pitbull gets a bad, undeserved rep, because they kill  80 times more often. Do you find that to be rational? Just asking.

You also said there is nothing wrong with buying a Pitbull. I am not going to make a moral judgement about purchasing Pitbulls. I was just suggesting that people do not buy them (never said to not aquire one), because I think the sooner we remove the monetary reward from the picture, the faster the population of Pitbulls with shrink, making the world a safer place for people and pets.

In any case, I think I have made my points, presented my case, and I doubt I can add anything that would make it stronger. So, I see no need to continue participation. There are other threads that are more important, like "Is it just me", so I leave those who wish to continue here, free to do so, have fun! Bye all!

I continue because people have such a wrong idea of pit bulls and are promoting killing pitbulls, or denying them families. They do love people.

The other sad thing is that pit bulls is now more a class of dogs, and not a breed anymore. The reason that is important is because, the stats are slanted. Many times, a dog attack is labeled as a pit bull, when it really wasn't a pit bull. So if 50% of deaths from dog attacks is attributed to a pit bull, but half of those were not really the former breed, pit bulls, but pit bulls get blamed, well..... 

I am against people owning dogs which are not domesticated dogs. Dingos should not be pets, unless the person is highly trained. Wolf hybrids should not exist. (I do know a person who owned a wolf hybrid. He was not a people animal. Not that he appeared vicious but he carried the traits of a wolf. He was very shy around people as wolfs tend to be. That means there is no general attachment or desire to be around people. That also means that if the wolf hybrid feels threatened, he is liable to attack. That is the same reason I consider a Boa dangerous. Snakes do not really bond with people, or like people in general. That makes them a risky pet. 

 People keep saying that pitbulls have powerful jaws, which is true, but they do not have the most powerful jaws. Mastiffs do. And dogs which have jaws as powerful as pitbulls include German Shepherds, and Rottweilers.  Most would be surprised to find out a snapping turtles jaws are more then twice as powerful as a Mastiff. The strongest jaw strength is the crocodile, almost 4 times more powerful then the Mastiff.  

With around 1,500 snakes kept as pets in U.S. homes in 2012, and 17 deaths  since 1978, you say that is only 1 in every 3 years.  There are about 70 million pet dogs in the U.S. About 6% of those are pitbulls. That means there are 4.2 million pet pit bulls. You say that pitbulls supposedly kill 80 times more then pet snakes? There are 2800 times more pit bulls kept as pets then snakes. That means statistically per capita, snakes are extremely more likely to cause a death then pitbulls. With only about 1500 pet snakes causing 1 death every three years, if there were as many pet snakes as there are pet pit bulls, the number of deaths from snakes would be 933 every three years vs 54 in 3 years blamed on pitbulls.  (I found that in 2012 the stats on pet snakes said the number was increasing and they estimated over 1100 pet snakes in 2012. Taking that number and increasing it by 25% is 1500 snakes. That is only a best guesstimate). 

 

[Omegaman 3.0]

Well, I thought I was done in this thread, but I suppose as long as there is misinformation, whether intentional or done in ignorance, I might feel compelled to respond.

The statistic that lacks credibility, the notion that there are 1100 to 1500 pet snakes, is absurd. I would venture there are more than that, in every major city. According to the U.S. Dept of Agriculture, Animal Health Division, there are over 220,000 snakes imported each year into the United States. Are we to suppose that those all go to zoos, or that they are for illegal release of not native species? I hardly think so. Adding to that, there are snake breeders in the U.S., some licensed many are not.

According to a PDF file on the White House website, 846,000 households have snakes. Are you making your numbers up? I don't think you are a dishonest person, but the only alternative I can see is that you are not a very thorough researcher. What ever the actual problem is, you have reduced your credibility with me, That same document declares that in the U.S, we spend $264,798,000 on snakes and snake supplies in the U.S. and 18% of households keep snakes. I have to admit, that number surprised me a lot, sounds high, but that is what the document declares (title is "The Modern Reptile Industry).

Using you 1500 number for the number of pet snakes, we can arrive at the figure of $176,532 spent for each snake, per year. I never knew that snakes were a hobby for the ultra rich. Anyway, let's move on to another thing you said:

"That means statistically per capita, snakes are extremely more likely to cause a death then pitbulls. With only about 1500 pet snakes causing 1 death every three years, if there were as many pet snakes as there are pet pit bulls, the number of deaths from snakes would be 933 every three years vs 54 in 3 years blamed on pitbulls."

Well, apart from your estimate of per capita deaths going out the window by underestimating the number of snakes by 576 times (assuming that household with snakes have only one snakes each - highly unlikely), there is the annoying little fact that the per capita numbers are not very relevant. On a per capita basis, only 1 in every 950,000 Americans died in the Twin Towers attack of 9/11, so I guess that wasn't that much of a problem.  Sometimes, totals mean more to people that per capita basis. I already granted you that there were a relatively small number of deaths due to Pitbull attacks, please do not pretend that those few deaths, are less significant because of a per capita estimate based on false numbers.

But go ahead if you like, we can continue to generate more bad publicity for your beloved Pitbulls if that is what you prefer. As a strategy though, I think you are doing more harm than good. Perhaps you should let sleeping dogs lie!

Never-the-less, here is an article that paints this breed in a better light, for the interest of our readers: http://www.pitbull411.com/history.html 

[Qnts2]

Well, I thought I was done in this thread, but I suppose as long as there is misinformation, whether intentional or done in ignorance, I might feel compelled to respond.

The statistic that lacks credibility, the notion that there are 1100 to 1500 pet snakes, is absurd. I would venture there are more than that, in every major city. According to the U.S. Dept of Agriculture, Animal Health Division, there are over 220,000 snakes imported each year into the United States. Are we to suppose that those all go to zoos, or that they are for illegal release of not native species? I hardly think so. Adding to that, there are snake breeders in the U.S., some licensed many are not.

According to a PDF file on the White House website, 846,000 households have snakes. Are you making your numbers up? I don't think you are a dishonest person, but the only alternative I can see is that you are not a very thorough researcher. What ever the actual problem is, you have reduced your credibility with me, That same document declares that in the U.S, we spend $264,798,000 on snakes and snake supplies in the U.S. and 18% of households keep snakes. I have to admit, that number surprised me a lot, sounds high, but that is what the document declares (title is "The Modern Reptile Industry).

Using you 1500 number for the number of pet snakes, we can arrive at the figure of $176,532 spent for each snake, per year. I never knew that snakes were a hobby for the ultra rich. Anyway, let's move on to another thing you said:

"That means statistically per capita, snakes are extremely more likely to cause a death then pitbulls. With only about 1500 pet snakes causing 1 death every three years, if there were as many pet snakes as there are pet pit bulls, the number of deaths from snakes would be 933 every three years vs 54 in 3 years blamed on pitbulls."

Well, apart from your estimate of per capita deaths going out the window by underestimating the number of snakes by 576 times (assuming that household with snakes have only one snakes each - highly unlikely), there is the annoying little fact that the per capita numbers are not very relevant. On a per capita basis, only 1 in every 950,000 Americans died in the Twin Towers attack of 9/11, so I guess that wasn't that much of a problem.  Sometimes, totals mean more to people that per capita basis. I already granted you that there were a relatively small number of deaths due to Pitbull attacks, please do not pretend that those few deaths, are less significant because of a per capita estimate based on false numbers.

But go ahead if you like, we can continue to generate more bad publicity for your beloved Pitbulls if that is what you prefer. As a strategy though, I think you are doing more harm than good. Perhaps you should let sleeping dogs lie!

Never-the-less, here is an article that paints this breed in a better light, for the interest of our readers: http://www.pitbull411.com/history.html 

Well, I thought I was done in this thread, but I suppose as long as there is misinformation, whether intentional or done in ignorance, I might feel compelled to respond.

The statistic that lacks credibility, the notion that there are 1100 to 1500 pet snakes, is absurd. I would venture there are more than that, in every major city. According to the U.S. Dept of Agriculture, Animal Health Division, there are over 220,000 snakes imported each year into the United States. Are we to suppose that those all go to zoos, or that they are for illegal release of not native species? I hardly think so. Adding to that, there are snake breeders in the U.S., some licensed many are not.

According to a PDF file on the White House website, 846,000 households have snakes. Are you making your numbers up? I don't think you are a dishonest person, but the only alternative I can see is that you are not a very thorough researcher. What ever the actual problem is, you have reduced your credibility with me, That same document declares that in the U.S, we spend $264,798,000 on snakes and snake supplies in the U.S. and 18% of households keep snakes. I have to admit, that number surprised me a lot, sounds high, but that is what the document declares (title is "The Modern Reptile Industry).

Using you 1500 number for the number of pet snakes, we can arrive at the figure of $176,532 spent for each snake, per year. I never knew that snakes were a hobby for the ultra rich. Anyway, let's move on to another thing you said:

"That means statistically per capita, snakes are extremely more likely to cause a death then pitbulls. With only about 1500 pet snakes causing 1 death every three years, if there were as many pet snakes as there are pet pit bulls, the number of deaths from snakes would be 933 every three years vs 54 in 3 years blamed on pitbulls."

Well, apart from your estimate of per capita deaths going out the window by underestimating the number of snakes by 576 times (assuming that household with snakes have only one snakes each - highly unlikely), there is the annoying little fact that the per capita numbers are not very relevant. On a per capita basis, only 1 in every 950,000 Americans died in the Twin Towers attack of 9/11, so I guess that wasn't that much of a problem.  Sometimes, totals mean more to people that per capita basis. I already granted you that there were a relatively small number of deaths due to Pitbull attacks, please do not pretend that those few deaths, are less significant because of a per capita estimate based on false numbers.

But go ahead if you like, we can continue to generate more bad publicity for your beloved Pitbulls if that is what you prefer. As a strategy though, I think you are doing more harm than good. Perhaps you should let sleeping dogs lie!

Never-the-less, here is an article that paints this breed in a better light, for the interest of our readers: http://www.pitbull411.com/history.html 

I looked for statistics for the number of pet snakes. The only figure I found was 'greater then 1100'.

My last sentence said '(I found that in 2012 the stats on pet snakes said the number was increasing and they estimated over 1100 pet snakes in 2012. Taking that number and increasing it by 25% is 1500 snakes. That is only a best guesstimate). '  Greater then 1100 does seem to be a small number. But, I could not find anything else, so as a guesstimate, I increased the statistical number by 25%,

If in the U.S. over 264 million is spent on snakes and and supplies, that is a lot of mice. I do question that almost 1/5th of the households keep snakes. That number is highly questionable. Based on those numbers, there should be at least 4 homes on my street with snakes. There are no homes with snakes on my street. My family is over 100 people (cousins), and not one has a snake. Based on your stats, 18 should own snakes. In my husbands family, one person has an iguana, but no snakes.

So, if there are really that many snakes in the U.S., that means single households which do have a snake, must have far more then just 1 snake. In my lifetime, I have known one person personally, who had a snake, and they had 5 or 6. I worked in a pet store for a while. There were 3 snakes for sale. In a years time, one sold. 

The point is, there are far fewer pet snakes then there are pet pit bulls. Of course in Florida, it appears that pet snakes are being released so that Florida has a huge problem with pythons. Well, I should say another theory is that some pythons got loose during a hurricane from pet stores. They are estimating over 100,000 loose pythons are causing huge issues. They are fast breeders. I also found that homes that have snakes, usually do not keep them for more then a year. The number of snake related injuries is climbing rapidly. And the large contrictors are becoming a huge issue for pets, such as dogs and cats, not just in Florida, but across the U.S.    

Admittedly, I am definitely snake phobic. There are groups which want to ban pet constrictors due to their danger as well as their abuse.  Among these groups is the Humane Society. On the flip side, the Humane Society supports the pet Pit Bull and is working to counter the bad rap given to pit bulls.    

[Omegaman 3.0]

Well Qnts2,

There is not a lot in that last post (I cannot speak for future edits of it of course) that I would disagree with. As I said though, even I found the numbers for pet snakes to seem high, but they are not MY statistics. I did not cherry pick the statistics I used I just did a google search and then from the results, picked websites that I had no reason to suspect would have a particular agenda. In other words, I did not figure the White House site and the Dept. of Agriculture, to be pro or anti snake. When I looked at those sites, I saw info that seemed to support what I suspected,  that the number of pet snakes certainly not limited to a couple of thousand.

You mentioned the notion, that $264 million, would buy a lot of mice. Of course, that would be true. However, when you add to mice, the cost of terrariums, heat rocks, gravel or other substrates, vitamins, U.V. Lamps, books, etc, the money spent on snakes is not limited to mice. That would be like saying that all one spends on dogs, is for dog food, and not consider vet bills, beds, toys, brushes and the like.

I know also, that you are intelligent enough to know, that anecdotal evidence, is pretty much meaningless. How many snakes you, and your aquaintences have is not evidence of anyting and therefore irrelevant, just as if I were to point out that I had 14 rattlesnakes at one time, and more over time (not to mention the numerous non-venomous snakes I have kept), at all reflects the habits of Americans in general. I am not even what I would consider to be a snake enthusiast. I just run across them from time to time, and take them in, I do not buy snakes, nor go looking for them. On occasion, I have found rattlesnakes in parking lots and have upon occasion, been contacted and asked if I would remove snakes from backyards, or other property.

I know that venomous s snakes are dangerous, so I make myself available to remove them from places where they pose a danger to people and pets, and relocate them to the wilderness for the safety of said persons and pets as well as the snakes themselves. 

I like animals, and do not advocate the killing of rattlesnakes or pit bulls. I do advocated reducing dangerous interactions between them.

I know people have prejudices against snakes and pit bulls. Recently, I was pointing out to someone, that cows kill more people than sharks do in the U.S. Yet somehow, many people hate sharks. I do not recall a single time where a shark same up on land an killed someone though, where as pit bulls, and many other things, are placed in positions where people are killed, and that is an unfortunate thing that just happens.