I’m always a huge fan of unbiased individuals putting the effort,time, blood,sweat and tears to help provide our community with a clear view and honest reporting.
Let me introduce the creator of Alldogsbite.com! This individual works hard at gathering media reports from near and far to offer more than just one sided misconstrued views. I had the pleasure of picking their brain for a bit!
ZombiesandDogs– Thank you for taking the time out of your busy day to answer some questions about you and your desire behind Alldogsbite.com!
Alldogsbite– Not a problem!
ZombiesandDogs– Fantastic! First question I have to ask: What made you decide to create a site that tracked dog bites?
Alldogsbite– I really just wanted to show that any dog can, and does bite. More importantly, those injuries can be just as devastating as the “pit bull” bites that others pretend are the only serious ones. In addition, I saw several that were NOT pit bulls that Dogsbite.Org listed as pits simply because they wanted to. When the media says a dog is a pit bull..or the owner does..that is the end of the argument to dogsbite.org, even when there is proof it’s incorrect.
On the other hand, when the media, owners or law enforcement say a dog ISN’T a pit bull in a serious attack, they must be lying and paid by the dog fighters. the dog that was attacked by the cat is a perfect example. The media, the owner and the shelter all said the dog was a chow mix, but dogsbite.org has insisted that someone is lying and it’s most definitely at least a pit mix. Based on nothing more than a grainy video and their need for it to be one.
ZombiesandDogs– I’ve got some great examples of example:
ZombiesandDogs– How do you feel about having multiple bite statistic pages- such as Dogsbite.org/CDC/NCRC? Do more options help dog owners and future dog owners?
Alldogsbite– I suppose it depends. It’s going to exist no matter what. I just hope that people are smart enough to take all the information for what it’s worth. It is impossible to get ALL the information for EVERY dog bite and guarantee the accuracy of that information. Fatal attacks are of course a bit easier because more attention is paid and more details are made public. But even then, if all you have is the media, it’s hit and miss. If something is completely slanted (like dogsbite.org) you are not going to get the real story about anything that doesn’t line up with the agenda of the “group” so none of it can really be considered accurate. The CDC has stopped tracking bites by breed because they realized it isn’t possible to formulate a true picture. The NCRC does much more than most by getting police reports, vet reports etc, but often the victims families have already been sucked into the DBO vortex and that probably makes it difficult for them to get a lot of the real story (since they look at causation, not just the end result). And when you have a victim running the show you know nothing is going to be coming from an unbiased or actually scientific place. That shoots DBO and DaxtonsFriends out of the running immediately. Or you get an attorney like Ken Phillips trying to put stuff out there and again, that’s how the guy makes his living. Is he going to downplay anything? No. He’s actually going to make everything as dramatic and horrific as possible, because that is what is going to play to a judge and jury. That’s how lawyers operate no matter what type of case they are handling. They just play up (or down) different parts of it depending on what side they are on.
ZombiesandDogs– I absolutely agree and I covered a bit on the absolute biased belief from Attorney Kenneth Philips in a previous post. My last question because I know your always super busy- How important is it to you to stay unbiased and focus on all dog attacks instead a select few from certain breeds?
Alldogsbite– 3. Some people think I’m just throwing under the breeds under the bus and that honestly is not the case. I’m simply trying to show that all dogs, under the right (or wrong) circumstances can hurt someone, kill someone, or go after other animals and livestock. The sad part is that so many attacks don’t get reported in the media and of course we can’t prove that, because the evidence doesn’t exist, because they haven’t reported it. But in many ways the proof is there if you look for it. Take a “pit bull” death and search it on google. A specific one. Then take a fatal attack by another breed and search it. I can almost guarantee you will find double the news reports for the “pit bull attack” than the other.
Here’s an example:
Look at the google search for an attack that happened in Davisburg. A 10 week old child who died when attacked by the family Catahoula (that DBO is also insisting was a pit bull)
Now look at the results for the attack (non-fatal but still horrible) on a 6 year old girl by two “pit bulls”.
these happened within days of each other.
This is to me, proof, that we need to make sure that people understand that just because the media chooses to show more of one than the other doesn’t mean that pit bulls are the problem. Looking at causation would be a great start, but by the time they get to that point, the excitement of the attack has already waned and they move on to the next story.
ZombiesandDogs– I remember both horrific tragedies and I also remember the almost dead focus from Dogsbite.org and members as they where more concerned on trying to prove it could or should be called a pit bull and zero focus on the grieving family.
I just want to thank Alldogsbite for this! I’m such a huge advocate in keeping people informed in a honest and from a unbiased point of view. Information like this only helps us all and it prevents us from falling victim to just thinking there is only ONE option in our source of information available.