Potentially Dangerous Breeds 76


This is a list of dog breeds that have a history of being potentially dangerous to people, especially children. Daxton’s Friends for Canine Education and Awareness understands that any dog has the ability to bite or inflict serious harm to humans. This list consists of several dog breeds that have a higher than average number of recorded human fatalities. Please use extreme caution if you choose to bring one of these breeds into your home. Rental communities and homeowners insurance may restrict many of the dog breeds on this list due to the likelihood of a serious incident.

Pit Bulls, Mastiff, and Rottweiler lead in fatalities and are listed first. The rest of the breeds are listed in alphabetical order:

Pit Bull Terrier Family





Alaskan Malamute

Chow Chow

Doberman Pinscher

German Shepherd

Shar Pei

Siberian Husky

Wolf Hybrid

Featured Pages:

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

76 thoughts on “Potentially Dangerous Breeds

    • Erin

      I’m surprised to see the St. Bernard on the list- they’re normally such babies. I suppose with a dog that large, even a half-hearted bite can do horrific damage.

      Even though I’m a proud GSD owner, I’m not surprised to see them on the list. My friend and I were attacked by a solid black one as a kid. We were very lucky my childhood Bernese mix was in the yard with us, because he held it off until her dad could come out with a baseball bat to knock the beast out.

      We got our shepherd from a reputable breeder at 8 weeks and took her to lots of training classes, in addition to heavy socialization at home. Owning a dog like this is a big responsibility- if you’re not willing to put in the time and money to make sure you have a good one, it could easily hop a fence to attack little girls. Working line are more stable than show line, IMO, and the solid colored ones seem to have more issues with their temperament.

  • Lisa

    The Queensland heeler is not on your list of dangerous + vicious dogs? Sometimes being referred to as the dingo.

    Is the Queensland heeler not considered a dangerous and vicious animal?

    • Daxtons Friends Post author

      What is the percentage of Dingo’s in the US? Because I don’t know anyone (or ever heard of someone) who owns them in the US.

      “Daxton’s Friends for Canine Education and Awareness understands that any dog has the ability to bite or inflict serious harm to humans. This list consists of several dog breeds that have a higher than average number of recorded human fatalities.”


    • Amy

      The Queensland Heeler is not the same thing as a dingo. It is simply another name for an Australian Blue Heeler, also called an Australian Cattle Dog. A dingo is a feral dog native to Australia. These were at one time (a very long time ago) domesticated dogs that returned to the wild. They are not considered suitable pets.

  • jane hands

    I have had Manchester Terrier as a child and Dobes all my adult life- I agree that, in the wrong hands, this breed has a potential to do damage…BUT they do not have the prey drive and mental stamina that Pitbulls show. You hit a Dobe hard enough and it will stop, even when it is pretty determined to kill it’s “prey”. NOTHING at all seems to get through to a Pitbull, the only way to stop them is to quite literally PRISE them off their prey with a break stick. Mastiffs can be very dangerous, but due mainly to their size and bite power- again, they have not been bred to fight and do not have the sociopathic staying power of a Pitbull….

  • Ophelia

    Perfect list. Covers nearly every dangerous beast that has no place being a pet. I’m certainly glad you mentioned german shepherds (didn’t capitalize it on purpose because I hate those monsters) since most people give those ugly things a pass for being police dogs even though they have one of the strongest bites of all large breeds (not counting pits and mastiffs of course). I only feel that a better title for this list would be Dangerous Dogs or Highly Aggressive Dogs instead of Potentially Dangerous Dogs, since let’s be honest, most of those dogs were bred for aggression, whether to people or other animals, so they are dangerous by default.

    Otherwise, great work!

    • Agnes

      What a horribly ignorant comment. German Shepherds can be great dogs, and very gentle with children if properly socialized! They’re very easy to train, and they’re often used as therapy dogs, seizure-detection dogs, and PTSD-support dogs for this reason. And no, not all of these dog breeds are dangerous, so that title would be ridiculous. I do hope you’re a troll.

  • Donald

    This website is the most one eyed bias collection of garbage i’ve ever seen. Lets begin the the “potentially dangerous breeds” ALL dogs have the inherent risk of danger. Have you ever seen the damage a miniature fox terrier does when it attacks or a bichon or a maltese with a little man complex. This all comes down to the raising of the animal. i’ve seen rottweilers brought down by maltese just as i have seen staffordshire bull terriers (which the naive call pit bulls due to the past use of them) bring down poodles. In my years of service the small to medium dogs attacking me have far outweighed the larger breeds.
    Donald H

    • Daxtons Friends Post author

      Just to clarify what we said at the top of the page:

      “This is a list of dog breeds that have a history of being potentially dangerous to people, especially children. Daxton’s Friends for Canine Education and Awareness understands that any dog has the ability to bite or inflict serious harm to humans. This list consists of several dog breeds that have a higher than average number of recorded human fatalities.”


  • Gwendolyn Iris

    I’m curious if there is any data out there on what lead to the fatalities as far as each breed. Like context matters, are Malamutes out there turning on their families? Or are they killing intruders or protecting their family from harm?

      • Amy

        You used a horribly inaccurate site as a source for information! I feel I need to point this out because your page says you want to educate. If that is true, you need factual information, which cannot be found anywhere on dogsbite.org. I strongly suggest you evaluate a site for it’s authenticity before you use it for “education!”

        • Daxtons Friends Post author

          Right on our homepage:

          If Daxton’s Friends is provided substantial evidence that we have shared incorrect information, we will correct or retract statements. We welcome feedback and invite you to share your thoughts about our organization. Please e-mail us at [email protected]. *Abusive and/or deceitful emails are subject to being published in full.*


  • Jack

    In order to provide a benefit to the public through your website, you have to include and use factual information. I want to point out that in your list above, for example, you list American Bulldog as being in the “Pit Bull Terrier Family”. This is 100% incorrect. American Bulldogs are a unique breed that are NOT in the terrier type dog family at all. If classifying by dog “type” they should be listed as being in the general “Bulldog” type dog family, although this would be incorrect as well, since they are a special and unique breed. In fact, there are only 4 identified and recognized “Pit Bull Terrier” breeds: American Staffordshire Terrier, American Bull Terrier, American Pitbull Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. The other breeds in your “Pit Bull Terrier Family” list are not correct.

    Please stick to the facts, otherwise you will be identified as a site that peddles misinformation and false data. Trying to help. Thanks.

  • Richard Sheppard

    I still say the owner has a lot to do with developing their dogs temperment a/o personality.All dogs must be socialized & repremanded agreeively when they do something wrong.They will still show love for their “master” but they will also be respectful of his ability to discipline them when they misbehave.This is “tuff love” it also works on children.

  • Mike

    I am just trying to find your stats that show confirmed incidents through with police reports or hospital records stating that the order the dogs are listed have confirmed and testable stats to back up the claims?

    Numbers don’t lie especially when from a confirmed course, so if that can be provided it would be greatly appreciated as it makes it very hard to contest.

    Ill leave you an example of what I am looking for:

    • Daxtons Friends Post author



      Maiming and death due to dog bites are uncommon but preventable tragedies. We postulated that patients admitted to a level I trauma center with dog bites would have severe injuries and that the gravest injuries would be those caused by pit bulls.


      We reviewed the medical records of patients admitted to our level I trauma center with dog bites during a 15-year period. We determined the demographic characteristics of the patients, their outcomes, and the breed and characteristics of the dogs that caused the injuries.


      Our Trauma and Emergency Surgery Services treated 228 patients with dog bite injuries; for 82 of those patients, the breed of dog involved was recorded (29 were injured by pit bulls). Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).


      Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites.


    • Daxtons Friends Post author

      “Media reports cannot be relied upon”
      The complaint is made that DogsBite.org, Daxton’s Friends and Animals 24/7 use media reports for breed identification. Media reports are multi-sourced and are based on police reports, statements from animal control officers, family members, witnesses and even veterinarians. There is no media conspiracy. A news article must be based on fact; if a reporter just makes up details the news source can be sued. Much has been made of the decision of the CDC to stop studying the area of fatal dog attacks and breed identification. Breed-specific advocates take this as something wonderful. They forget, however, that the 20-year joint CDC, AVMA study (Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the United States Between 1979 and 1998) determined most of their breed identifications directly from news sources.

      We collected data from The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and media accounts related to dog bite attacks and fatalities, using methods from previous studies.1-3 The HSUS maintains a registry of human DBRF, including date of death, age and sex of decedent, city and state of attack, number and breeds of dogs involved, and circumstances relating to the attack. To supplement HSUS reports, as in the past, a database6 was searched for accounts of human DBRF that occurred in 1997 and 1998. Our search strategy involved scanning the text of newspapers and periodicals for certain words and word combinations likely to represent human DBRF followed by a review of articles containing those terms. Data obtained from HSUS and news accounts were merged to maximize detection of human DBRF and avoid duplicate reports. – CDC/AVMA study authors

      Also from this study:
      Despite these limitations and concerns, the data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities. – CDC/AVMA study authors

      Take a look at the entire 20-year study. There are some tables that should make anyone think twice. The only difference today is that these two dog breeds now account for 76% of all deaths. From January 2005 to December 2015, dogs in this country killed 360 people. The combination of pit bulls and rottweilers accounted for 273 deaths. Modern data shows that the CDC was absolutely correct about the “breed-specific problem with fatalities.”

      Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the United States Between 1979 and 1998, by Sacks, Sinclair, Gilchrist, Golab and Lockwood, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, September 15, 2000, Vol. 217, No. 6, Pages 836-840 (https://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/images/dogbreeds-a.pdf)

    • Joe Brown

      The CDC used to track these incidents by breed but through overwhelming pressure from special interest groups they have stopped. Just prior to this stoppage the CDC admitted that deaths and serious injuries by pit bulls and rottweilers were far and above more common than all other breeds combined. I do not recall the year they dropped the ball but you can find it with a google search.

      These failures by the CDC have forced public reliance on press reports initially, and from there the confirmations with mediacl records and police reports are performed.

      This method of using press reports and confirming with more official records are the exact procedure the CDC used. The only difference is the people doing it. One can easily argue and win that the people doing it now are far more efficient, effective and accurate than any government agency.

  • Concerned citizen

    You are missing quite a few breeds from your “Potentially Dangerous Breeds” list. As a child I was attacked by a Dalmatian, it jumped the owners fence and attacked me when I was playing on the sidewalk with my brothers, I was around 7 and could not walk for weeks because it torn through my knee, later research stated that the breed is not so good with children, despite the portrayal as the “Fireman’s Dog”. I also had numerous close calls with a relatives Dachshunds I did not get bit but my brothers did on several occasions, the little weiner dogs are vicious, so they should be on the list too. Also at about 6 I was bitten on the face by a Scottish Terrier and I was lucky that it got me around the mouth area and not the eye, as I would most likely have lost vision, so that should also be added to your list. At 13 I was bitten on the arm by a Silky Terrier, which should also go on your list. I was also bitten on the ankle by a Chihuahua and could not walk for weeks because it bit deep enough into the tendon for it to swell and be extremely painful. I did not provoke any of those attacks, I was minding my business and those dogs came after me! And the most disturbing aspect is that the little dogs were not behind a fence or on a leash, their owners allowed them to roam freely because they were little. Basically, I have been around ALL kinds of dogs throughout my life, including many of those on your list, and I have been attacked time after time by little dogs. You should include those to your list too! Just because they are small does not mean they cannot be fatal, especially to babies, so if you are going to be fair about it you should put every dog on the list. I have seen more vicious behavior from little dogs that from big ones, and generally children will try and approach a small dog more frequently than a large one. It is important for your site to promote responsibility on the part of the owner, dogs will be dogs no matter what breed, they are not humans, they cannot understand on the same level as humans, therefore they should not be expected to act in a manner that humans deem as acceptable, they will act as dogs because that is what they are. It is irresponsible for any site to only list large dogs as aggressive and dangerous, every dog has the potential to attack and that should be kept in mind when any individual decides to become a dog owner.

    • Daxtons Friends Post author

      I’m going to approve this comment simply because it is so incredibly stupid and anecdotal. Right AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE:

      Daxton’s Friends for Canine Education and Awareness understands that any dog has the ability to bite or inflict serious harm to humans. This list consists of several dog breeds that have a higher than average number of recorded human fatalities.

      • Brandie

        lmao I was thinking the same thing. All dogs have the potential to bite. There are just some breeds that are well known to bite and cause serious injury or death. I have boxers and I did not know this about them. They are very sweet, loving dogs, and are usually good with people when we introduce them to the dogs in a safe manner, allowing the dogs to smell them while we keep hold of their collar or leash. After a couple minutes they settle down and then want to play with the person or people. The reason I came to this site was because my male boxer ( who is a big puppy lap dog of 2 years old) “bit” ( I still say it was a scratch from the dog jumping on him) a child on the face who entered our home without our consent. The reason I say it was a scratch though I have not seen the injury and it required 14 stitches, is that I know my dog. He jumps on people wanting to play and his nails can cut deep when playing around. He doesn’t mean to harm anyone, it just happens. They way the mother described the wound to me sounds like a deep scratch with a puncture wound from the nails rather than a bite, because its a long gash starting above the eye to under it with the puncture being under the eye where the nails would have dug in the most. I wish she would let me see the wound so I could tell for sure. I think its wrong to punish a dog for doing its job in protecting its home and family. The kid was no threat, but he did come in our door without our permission or any fore knowledge of him coming. He has never been to our home before so we did not anticipate nor expect him to just walk in the door. Anyway. Now I know they are on this list so I will be even more diligent in making sure this doesn’t happen to someone else.

    • Kathy

      I agree with the Dalmation comment. I have been around 3 different Dalmatians that were very aggressive. 2 of them We knew very well and they attacked my husband when unprovoked. The third bit the owners’ child on the face unprovoked (witnessed). It was the first breed that came to my mind when I read the list. Otherwise the list is comprehensive.

    • Daxton's Friends


      The reason these dogs make the “Potentially” dangerous list is not due to lack or responsible ownership or proper training, but that despite doing everything “right”, these dogs can still be dangerous. The dogs that killed Daxton were trained, altered, and living in a loving home and after 3 years of proper care, they pulled a 14 month old from the arms of their owner and launched an attack that could not be stopped. There is no removing the “tag” of dangerous. Due to genetics and breeding, they will always be dangerous.

      We agree with many of the breeds that were listed on the dangerous dog list that you included. The issue is that the list is compromised primarily of obscure dog breeds. By including so many obscure breeds, it gives the impression that there are a ton of dangerous dog breeds out there and takes the focus away from the more common threats, such as pit bulls and Rottweilers. Many of the obscure breeds are bully breeds, but the average person is not going to realize that.

      Thank you for commenting.

      • Thea Strassburg

        Years ago, I would have insisted that any one dog breed was more dangerous than the next. Today? No. We are animal lovers, passionate ones. But after researching this subject over the last few years, it is clear to me that certain breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. Pit Bulls are on the top of that list. I have seen too many statistics, too many fatalities, to turn my head from the facts. And typically, only the severe attacks on people get media attention. There are scores more stories of pits being dog aggressive, of families losing pets to pit bull attacks. I do not hate pits. There are animals, it is not their fault, we created them. We have to educate people about these breeds, and the risks owning one presents.
        With pits, there is zero margin for error. Once they attack, the devastation is unavoidable. They cannot be deterred, and as soon as an attack begins, it is over and someone is going to be catastrophically maimed or killed. Dax sounds like an little cutie pie, and his face is just… angelic.

  • Wendy Seeley

    Are you concentrating on dogs that bite or dogs who, if provoked and defend themselves will most likely cause damage? I’ve been bitten and have scars from my chihuahuas but never by Rotties or Pitt. This page seems to employ sensationalism and scare tactics and, while I’m sorry for your loss, most dogs do not attack without provocation whether it’s fear, protection, or poor training/handling from/by ignorant owners.

    • Toni P.


      So called dog lovers portray the Chihuahua as the dog to be feared, but unfortunately the bite numbers reported by many animal control agencies do not support that claim. There is also a difference between a bite from a Chihuahua and that of a pit bull type dog or Rottweiler. When it comes to serious maulings and fatalities, the Chihuahua has not had any. It seems that dangerous dog breed advocates all have a story about a Chihuahua caused puncture wound that did not need serious medical attention and desperately want parents of deceased children to know that it is clearly the same as the injuries their child suffered. I must ask since you claim that most dogs do not attack without “provocation”, why did your own Chihuahuas bite you? Just so you know, people who truly “sorry for your loss”, usually do not internet follow the parent of a deceased child and make disgusting comments on their dead kid’s website. They say something supportive or nothing at all. For the future, I politely suggest saying nothing at all.

      • Krista Barnes

        That’s actually not true. I worked at a large high volume municipal shelter for 7 years between 2001-2008, and part of my job was to compile bite statistics for our director present to City Council. What I found was that there was no correlation between breed and the number of bites of attacks committed by that breed, however, there was a HUGE correlation between unaltered male dogs and bites/attacks. when i compiled my stats, I did list them by dog breed, but the numbers were so negligible that their really wasn’t any correlation. If you are curious though, retriever mixes and border collies were the breeds that committed the most amount of attacks/bites (but they are very common/popular dogs, so it makes sense that their numbers were higher). I will say this though…..whenever the media got wind of a dog bite, they would often misidentify the dog as a “pit-bull”. It used to make us laugh especially during one particular instance when it was actually a border collie that had committed the attack. Reporters would also always come into our building and try to get us to comment or to see and take pictures of the dog in question and would lie to us and say “I spoke to the director and he said you could comment”, or “your supervisor said we could take a picture of the dog” LOL. I kind of stopped trusting the media after working there. I guess if it bleeds it leads, and facts don’t really matter in main stream media. I don’t work there anymore but I’m always willing to provide facts and info if anyone is interested in hearing it first hand. With so much media manipulation and people being dishonest on blogs and skewing facts, it’s hard to know what to believe.

        • Daxtons Friends Post author

          The term “pit bull” in lower-case letters refers to three closely-related breeds. The original breed was the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, a dog bred for pit fighting in the 18th and 19th centuries in the UK. After importation to the U.S. in the late 19th century, they continued to be used for fighting, but were bred to be taller and heavier. These larger cousins were then registered in the UKC as “American Pit Bull Terriers” (1898) and in the AKC as the “American Staffordshire Terrier” (1936). Note that these are identical breeds under two different names, and many individuals hold conformation championships in both registries. In addition, some of the original, smaller dogs were reimported from the UK and were recognized in the AKC as the original “Staffordshire Bull Terriers” (1935).

          A 2013 ASPCA double-blind study revealed that shelter workers were able to correctly identify dogs with significant ‘pit bull’ blood (‘pit bull’ = the 3 breeds above) 96% of the time, as confirmed by DNA tests.


        • Daxtons Friends Post author

          In Ohio the Supreme Court wrote a decision in the state of Ohio v. Anderson that used the words over and over”a dog owner of ordinary intelligence can identify a pit bull.” https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=1496137140642653899&q=State+of+Ohio+v.+Anderson&hl=en&as_sdt=2%2C44&as_vis=1
          Here is a quote ” In sum, we reject the appellee’s contention that the phrase “commonly known as a pit bull dog” is so devoid of meaning that R.C. 955.11(A)(4)(a)(iii) is unconstitutionally void for vagueness. Pit bull dogs possess unique and readily identifiable physical and behavioral traits which are capable of recognition both by dog owners of ordinary intelligence and by enforcement personnel. Consistent and detailed descriptions of the pit bull dog may be found in canine guidebooks, general reference books, statestatutes and local ordinances, and state and federal case law dealing with pit bull legislation. By reference to these sources, a dog owner of ordinary intelligence can determine if he does in fact own a dog commonly known as a pit bull dog within the meaning of R.C. 955.11 (A)(4)(a)(iii). Similarly, by reference to these sources, dog wardens, police officers, judges, and juries can enforce the statute fairly and evenhandedly. Consequently, we find that R.C. 955.11(A)(4)(a)(iii) is not unconstitutionally void for vagueness. ”

          Toledo v. Tellings covers the ID issue as well as constitutionality, this is also a state Supreme Court ruling.

        • Daxtons Friends Post author

          By now, most people have probably heard pitbull apologia’s desperate and deplorable cry that there is a “media bias” against pitbulls. Seeking to mitigate the stark contrast between the volume of attacks betwixt the ‘chosen breed’ and others, they claim that the media over-reports or reports only pitbull attacks, and that other breeds attack all the time but go under-/un-reported.

          Now let it first be said what the criteria for an attack is… finger-nips, one quick bite-and-release, and self-defense/fear biting that results in only superficial injury is NOT newsworthy. Such a deluge of common happenstance would saturate the media so much that it would be extremely difficult know much of anything if we had to sludge our way through ‘report’ after report of every growl and nip. What constitutes an attack, and what I am referring to when I use the term here is;

          Serious injury requiring urgent medical care, such as:

          -lacerations deep enough to require stitches or staples

          -significant and dangerous blood loss

          -broken bones

          -snapped spines

          -cracked or crushed skulls/ribs

          -lacerated internal organs



          -disfigurement through loss of eye/ear/nose/lips/muscle tissue/cartilage/bone/scalp or degloving (being ‘skinned’ through traumatic ripping force)

          -permanent nerve damage

          -permanent loss of bodily function

          -brain damage

          -loss of limbs

          -loss of life, and/or dismemberment

          Read more: http://thecaninegamechanger.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-media-is-plotting-against.html?spref=tw&m=1

        • Daxtons Friends Post author

          The purpose of a breed-specific ordinance, nearly always targeting pit bulls, was never to “prevent all dog bites,” as the AVMA/CDC states in the 2000 study. Such laws are designed to significantly reduce the 5% (serious injuries) and eliminate the 2% (mauling and maiming injuries and deaths) inflicted by well-documented dangerous dog breeds.

          Read more: https://www.daxtonsfriends.com/2014/07/non-profits-urge-cdc-resume-collecting-richer-data-set-for-dog-bite-fatalities/

          Briefly, the joint study, and the last issued by the CDC on this subject, “Special Report: Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the United States Between 1979 and 1998,” was published in September 2000. The study was comprised of two human medical doctors and three animal “experts,” specifically, two veterinarians from the AVMA and one animal behaviorist.

          The 2000 study was a culmination of three studies before it, which added 27 new deaths (from 1997 and 1998) to human fatalities examined in previous studies (from 1979 to 1996). The focal point of the 2000 study is clearly identified in its conclusions, which issued a policy statement unfavorable to breed-specific laws, despite no investigation of its effectiveness, along with using misleading vernacular about the purpose of breed-specific ordinances, which was and still is to dramatically reduce serious injuries and to eliminate mauling and maiming injuries and deaths.

          Our other primary concern is the heavily weighted role of the AVMA in a United States government study examining human fatalities. Not only did the AVMA manage to ensure animal “experts” were represented on a study about health and human safety, they managed to ensure they were the majority of the study authors.

          Additionally, when the study was released in 2000, it was not directly released to the American public. Instead, it was published in an AVMA journal (JAVMA), a private technical journal for veterinarians. This confused the U.S. media at that time, which initially called the study, “by the American Veterinary Medical Association.”

          The AVMA even had to release a statement, along with a copyright notice to press members who requested a copy (attached). The “Special Report” to the American people could not even be freely distributed due to the AVMA copyright.

          Now 14-years later, the AVMA/CDC study has been abruptly elevated into the public eye once again, this time by the White House, for political purposes or simply lack of knowledge. It is possible that the White House is even unaware that all three military divisions, the U.S. Army, U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Air Force, have adopted uniform pet policies that ban this same handful of dog breeds from all privatized housing, domestic and abroad. Col. Richard P. Flatau Jr., commanding officer of Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, stated the reason why most aptly in April 2009 following Camp Lejeune’s policy shift:

          “These specific breeds present an unreasonable risk to the health and
          safety of our residents and are therefore prohibited.”

          The CDC will tell you that they already did examine this issue. They will point you to the “policy” results of the dated 2000 study.

          Yet, in the 2000 study, the CDC made the following statement, which diametrically opposes their rabies initiative of a large-scale apparatus to “prevent just one death,” as well as the very foundation of public health.

          “Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites.”

          Click here to read full CDC remedy document: https://www.dogsbite.org/pdf/dogsbiteorg-cdc-remedies-dog-maulings-and-fatalities.pdf

        • Daxtons Friends Post author

          Also, I’m not sure where you’re getting your stats from, but right here in Milwaukee pit bulls jump off the charts of the breeds of dogs that ‘bite’ the most. Here is an interview with Jeff Borchardt. (Father of Daxton and Board Chair of this organization) Watch the interview: http://www.cbs58.com/story/27349435/are-pit-bulls-a-dangerous-breed

          Also, from the 2011 Texas Study:



          Maiming and death due to dog bites are uncommon but preventable tragedies. We postulated that patients admitted to a level I trauma center with dog bites would have severe injuries and that the gravest injuries would be those caused by pit bulls.


          We reviewed the medical records of patients admitted to our level I trauma center with dog bites during a 15-year period. We determined the demographic characteristics of the patients, their outcomes, and the breed and characteristics of the dogs that caused the injuries.


          Our Trauma and Emergency Surgery Services treated 228 patients with dog bite injuries; for 82 of those patients, the breed of dog involved was recorded (29 were injured by pit bulls). Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).


          Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites.


        • Daxton's Friends


          I am the author of the canine biographies and worked in the animal field for 15 years, including animal control. I have to strongly disagree with your comment. There is a definite correlation between dog breed, bites, and the severity of the bites. I found no correlation between altering and bites. About half of all biting dogs were altered. Many of our severe bites were also done by altered dogs. One of our worst cases were two altered pit bulls from a rescue. These dogs were so bad that they were sent to boot camp and still attacked after extensive training. The majority of our severe bites were done by pit bulls. Pit bulls were also the breed most likely to leave their own residence to bite. All the cases where the dog had to beaten , tasered, or shot off the victim were pit bulls, no exceptions.

          As for the media, in my whole career, I only had the media report on two bite cases. One was due to their being multiple victims with life threatening injuries and the other was because a neighborhood rose up and demanded change. Both cases were pit bulls. The media is not misreporting dog breeds. They just state them as they are told. When a dog breed is misreported, it is usually a pit bull being disguised as a boxer or lab mix. There has been many times we had to change the breed to pit bull because it was clearly not a boxer or lab. By mislabeling these dogs, it throws the statistics off and gives the illusion that boxer and lab bites are higher than they are, which is unfair to these breeds.

          Thank you for your comment. We appreciate your thoughts.

    • Julie

      Wendy, People’s positive anecdotal experiences with pit bulls does not change the fact that pit bull type dogs are the number one canine killer of people, other people’s beloved pets, and livestock of all other dog breeds combined and of all time. If all these dog owners would have picked a safer pet like a beagle instead of a pit bull many people, other people’s pets and livestock would be alive today. What other type of dog has the ability to kill humans that would be mistaken for a pit bull type? These families know exactly what breed killed their loved one. You can read their individual tragedies here: https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2014.php

      Two words to prove pit bull type dogs are inherently dangerous, “BREAK STICK’.

      Pit Bull Rescue Central recommends ALL pit guardians to have a “break stick”, a wedge-shaped piece of wood used to pry open a pit bull’s jaw during an attack. RED FLAG! Does not sound like a safe family pet if you need a break stick on hand. “Since pit bulls have a strong fighting background, we recommend that pet owners also have a breaking stick as a precaution, even if they don’t plan to use it in an illegal context. However, please be discreet. Breaking sticks are not something to brag about and the general public might have the wrong impression if you walk around with a stick in your hand. Breaking sticks are not illegal, but they are considered dog fighting paraphernalia in certain states and/or with certain law enforcement agents.” http://www.pbrc.net/breaksticks.html This person demonstrates how to use a break stick on a pit-bull: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfMVH4wY5Pg

      Pit-bull Rescue Central, the leading authority of pit bull types, admits MOST pit-bull types are not safe around other dogs because of their genetics. For that reason alone is why I do not consider them safe family pets for our neighborhoods. These are powerful animals that break away from their guardians all the time and maul & kill another beloved pet or person in front of a child or person. This is a typical pit attack on another beloved pet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZTiGWgQubA Too many children & adults have watched their beloved pets be mauled to death by pit bulls. Many develop Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder after watching a horrific pit attack: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=684_1405912995

      According to Pit Bull Rescue Central, “It is a FACT that our pit bulls, AmStaffs and pit mixes come with a built-in fighting heritage.It doesn’t matter where we get them from, whether it be the pound, a stray we pick up, or a puppy we buy from a breeder. The majority of pit bulls will, at some point in their lives, exhibit some degree of dog-on-dog aggression. Yet, chances are that a “normal” pit bull will not share his affection with other animals.We cannot predict when or where it will happen and we can’t love, train or socialize it out of the dog. Pit bulls may not start fights, but they will finish them.” http://www.pbrc.net/misc/PBRC_dogpark.pdf

      It all starts with the ethical breeder willing to produce a dog with a stable inherited temperament. Domestic animals are selectively bred for certain traits, people are not. It is not possible to discriminate against dog breeds that are purposely bred for certain traits and characteristics. Dog breeding is the practice of mating selected dogs with the intent to maintain or produce specific qualities and characteristics. There are over 400 dog breeds and pit bull breeders are the only ones who are breeding for aggression, tenacity and power to create the ultimate canine gladiator. The reality is that it is not how you raise them, it is how they are bred. “Love” will not take away a pit bulls inherent drive to kill. They are supplying to dog fighters, drug dealers, gang members, people who want a guard dog or a dog that looks like a protection dog. Aggression is a dominant trait resulting in a 75% chance of inheritance. One needs to actively breed to eliminate it through selective breeding and deliberate attrition, things that back yard breeders never do. Another problem is the rampant inbreeding with pit bull that produces unsafe dog. Pit-bull type dogs are the number one dog surrendered to shelters, a million every year, mostly because of aggression issues. Then many are rehomed by irresponsible pit bull advocates back into our communities. Watch this clip of unethical backyard breeders: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiZOj9o6jpE So basically people who have pits are playing Russian Roulette against our communities.

      In depth look at pit bull breeders: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2geom3

      From Rescue Train &the guru of pit bulls who has a national TV show called Pitbull & Parolees, Tia Torres /Villalobos Rescue Center “It’s a mistake to think the fighting gene can be easily trained or loved out of a pit-bull.” http://www.therescuetrain.org/pit_bull_education.php

    • Thea Strassburg

      This is the mentality I had years ago as well. I get it! But with pits, there is zero margin for error. Once a pit attacks, it is going to end in catastrophic injuries. There is no going back, it’s over. When we talk about “provocation”, what we are really saying is “the child stepped on his paw, so of course the pit mauled him to death”. While some dogs may snap, or even nip, when aggravated, people don’t die as a result. Education, caution, better control of breeding, all can help keep people, and pit bulls, safer.

      • Daxtons Friends Post author

        Zero Margin of Error Rule

        On Father’s Day, another tirade unfolded on Jeff’s timeline. In this case, the “So sorry for your loss … BUT” post related to the perfect dog owner concept or what DogsBite calls the “zero margin of error” rule for pit bull owners. If only Susan had “exactly” followed the rules set forth by the boy’s parents, Dax would still be alive. Susan was imperfect on March 6th and broke the “zero margin of error” rule for pit bull owners by carrying Dax outside while letting the dogs into the run.

        If there had been two poodles in the run that day instead of pit bulls, would the result have been the same?

        Many pit bull owners — particularly those duped by the myth, “It’s all how you raise them” — are unaware of this rule until it is too late. The margin of error between humans and normal dog breeds is a vast meadow. Humans and dogs can make small, medium and large errors within this area without significant repercussions. Pit bull owners, however, have “zero margin of error” — one simple error or oversight can result in a catastrophic or fatal pit bull mauling.

        Perfect dog owners are similar to perfect parents — both are nonexistent. There are strengths and weaknesses in each role, even average and great, but never perfection. Susan did not leave this child unattended on that day, which was the other option, to leave Dax in a room in the house alone while the dogs took a bathroom break. Zealous pit bull advocates would have the public believe that perfect dog owners and the “zero margin of error” rule are reasonable.

        Only pit bull experts, a selection of zealous pit bull owners and dogfighters — real knowers of the breed — understand the “zero margin of error” rule. The broader category of pit bull owners, such as what Susan falls within, is either in denial of the rule or has no idea of its existence. Duped by the pervasive myth, “It’s all how you raise them,” along with similar myths, “It’s the owner” and “All dogs are the same,” how would the average pit bull owner even know about this rule?

        Read more: https://blog.dogsbite.org/2013/07/beyond-the-interview-essay-of-a-fatal-pit-bull-mauling.html?m=1

    • Crystal

      That’s ridiculous! There is nothing sensationalist about this website. I just stumbled on it tonight and it’s quite obvious that Its goal is to educate people about the dangers inherent in certain dog breeds using FACTS. Have you read any of the links provided? FACT: there were 35 dog fatalities last year, 2025, in the U.S. FACT: 27 of them were by pit bulls and Rotweilers. What part of this statistic is confusing to you? Obviously these grieving parents whose child was killed by pit bulls feel impassioned to educate people about dangerous dog breeds, and possibly spare other parents the agony of what they and their little child went through. So what if you’ve only been bitten by your chihuahuas and never got bit by a pit bull or Rotweiler? It doesn’t change the FACTS that pit bulls and Rots cause WAY more fatalities than any other breeds and will do it without provocation, poor training, handling, blah, blah,blah. That is the whole point of this website — to warn people that they will! Try not to be so ignorant.

    • Nick

      Wendy , just google ” dog bite fatalities ” to get yourself an education .
      Oh , and bye the way , what did you do to provoke those poor Chihuahua’s into defending themselves against you ?

  • Tracy

    You, sir, are a disgrace to any K9 community, website, and have no business putting INCORRECT information out to obviously ignorant masses. (I refer to the “..lab ate a baby” comment). Shame on you for putting this garbage out there. I am literally in shock here that anyone would create a site labeling dogs like this, with no research done by you..are your sources the internet? Like, where your dribble is? Disgusting that you have the power of words and try to instill fear and hate. Have you ever even met a mastiff? All I can do is shake my head and pray your computer dies…every single computer you touch dies and you can never post this crap again.

    • Toni P.


      Just to be clear, the person writing these dog biographies is a woman. You can call me Miss, not sir. If you took the time to read the biographies on the “Potentially Dangerous” list, you would see the sources listed. To answer your question, yes…I have met a Mastiff. Many of them to be exact. I have even worked closely with my local Mastiff rescue. I also own a Mastiff mix. I did not write these biographies based on the love of my dog or any dog, I wrote them with my head. While I love my dog, I do not pretend that he is not a dog or a Mastiff mix. Mr. Borchardt has visited my house with his Chihuahua mix and proper precautions were taken despite my dog never showing an ounce of dog aggression. It’s okay to accept the positive and negative traits of any dog breed. It doesn’t mean that I don’t love my dog. As much as I love my dog, I will never own a Mastiff mix again. It is a huge responsibility. Despite your wishes, my computer continues to work just fine and I will keep on typing. You can address all your responses to me.

    • Thea Strassburg

      Being aware of the special responsibilities owners of pits have, and educating others to the stark reality that pits kill more humans then all other breeds combined in the same time frame, is a good thing. What amazes me is that some of these posts seem to utterly ignore that this man’s child was killed by pit bulls. Anyone who attacks or globally judges this man or his mission are just inexplicable to me.
      His child died because he was, like many others, lulled into a false sense of security that pits are not more dangerous than other dogs. The aggression and insults tossed at him for his work in trying to prevent more fatalities, especially among children, may be saving lives.

  • Sonya Cerezo

    Please Jeff, put this site in Spanish and other widely spoken languages here. Think of how many more people that could be reached and educated, and made aware.

  • Linda largo

    Please ad Labrador retrievers to your list. If you do some research, several have killed, and even eaten children ( Oklahoma) More lbradors bite people, and children than any other breed.
    Also, rather recently, 2 shiba inus killed a newborn ( premie)
    A Pomeranian also killed a baby.
    Dangers of ANY dog with a child cannot be overstated. People need to be aware.

    • Daxtons Friends Post author

      Another problem with the Labrador is that shelters often use the breed’s name to disguise the fact that a shelter dog is part pit bull or some other ‘bull breed’ mix. It can be impossible to tell by looking at a ‘Labrador mix’ whether it is in fact part Labrador or if it’s really a ‘bully’ mix. If you decide that the Labrador is the breed for you, the only way to be sure you are really getting a Labrador is to buy a pup from a reputable breeder.

      Labrador Retrievers are large dogs, weighing 55 to 100 lbs. They are average shedders and have minimal grooming requirements. Labradors have a life expectancy of 10-12 years. They are healthy, overall, but are prone to hip and elbow dysplasia, ear infections, and eye disorders.

      In North America, from 1982-2013, Labrador Retrievers have seriously attacked 50 humans, resulting in 3 fatalities. Labrador Retriever mixes have seriously attacked 26 humans, resulting in 1 fatality. Pit bull type dogs are often listed as Labrador Retriever mixes and it is possible that these numbers may be incorrect due to breed mislabeling

      Click here to read more about the Labrador retriever

      In North America, from 1982-2013, Pit Bull breeds and mixes have seriously attacked 2,990 humans that resulted in 1,777 maimings and 275 deaths.

      In North America from 1982-2013, Rottweilers were responsible for 514 attacks on humans, resulting in 81 deaths. Rottweiler mixes were responsible for 30 attacks on humans, resulting in 4 deaths.

      In North America, from 1982-2013, Akitas and their mixes have been responsible for 75 serious attacks on humans that resulted in 8 fatalities. Forty-two of the victims were children.

      In North America, from 1982 to 2013, Doberman Pinschers have seriously attacked 18 humans, resulting in 10 maimings and 7 fatalities.

      Click here to read more about Mia Gibson, 3 mo old, killed by the family Shiba inu.

        • Daxtons Friends Post author


          This is a list of dog breeds that have a history of being potentially dangerous to people, especially children. Daxton’s Friends for Canine Education and Awareness understands that any dog has the ability to bite or inflict serious harm to humans. This list consists of several dog breeds that have a higher than average number of recorded human fatalities.


          • Linda largo

            LABS are number one in bites, they are HUNTING dog designed to go after prey. They bite more people than any other breed. In Iowa a lady had her nose ripped off by a lab after it jumped a fence and attacked her and her beagle. I lab ATE a baby!!!

          • Toni P.


            Labs are not bred to “go after prey”. I think you have misunderstood how labs are used for hunting. Labrador Retrievers are bred to RETRIEVE the prey AFTER the hunter has killed it. That is why they are soft mouthed dogs. Their soft mouth carries the prey back to the hunter without damaging it. Labs are the most popular dog breed in the U.S. because they have outgoing personalities and tend to get along with people and most other animals.

            I fully realize that now because I have said that, you are combing through Google trying to find that one lab that did act aggressively towards other animals. You will likely return with that incident and then use what is a rarity for the breed to try to convince people it is the majority. I am sure that some labs have been the exception to the rule. There always is the exception, but it is exactly that, the exception. Dogs are purposely bred to be generalizations, and it is far more common for a lab to be friendly towards other animals than aggressive.

      • Krista Barnes

        You could also get a DNA test to see what breed of dog it is. I have to say that I have never encountered a shelter who “disguise the fact that a shelter dog is part pit bull or some other ‘bull breed’ mix.”. In fact I found the opposite to be true. Any dog with a big head is often labelled as “pit-bull” when often it isn’t . This is especially true for larger labs with bigger heads (often originating from English bloodlines). In fact there was purebreed, CKC registered and microchipped Lab in Ontario that was taken from it’s owners and euthanized immediately for being a “pitbull” because pitbulls are banned in Ontario. I believe the owner was walking him on a leash and a police officer seized the dog. It was euthanized before the owner could get home to collect the papers and make it down to the shelter. I can’t remember all of the details but it was all over the news a while ago. Anyway our humane society clearly identifies pit bulls and has the adopter take obedience classes when they adopt the dog. We also have a pit bull rescue in our city and they also have mandatory professiona,l one-on-one training classes and home visits before adoption. I personally would like to see that done with every dog adopted, not just pit bulls, because frankly, most people are terrible at training dogs and reading k-9 body language.

    • Toni P.

      I appreciate your suggestions, but I am not adding those breeds to our “Potentially Dangerous” list. I understand that pit bull activists consistently focus on bites and deaths from other breeds to try to deflect attention from their own favorite breed, but the lab has been the most popular for over 25 years and the amount of serious bites and fatalities reflect that. Pit Bulls on the other hand, have never been the most popular breed and they are #1 for bites, maimings, and fatalities.

      The purpose of the dog biographies is to give honest and realistic information. The dogs on the “Potentially Dangerous” list are the ones that are considered risky to own and have the greatest potential for injuries and fatalities. I have personally written all the bios and base them on facts and have a team of colleagues that the information is discussed thoroughly with. They are not written based on any bias towards breeds and do not reflect my personal favorites. I own a dog breed that is on the list.

      The best way to advocate for certain dog breeds is to promote honest information.

  • Carmen Wathen

    I am grateful for your site and so is my son. We have learned a lot from Daxton’s website and from Dogsbite.org. We are so thrilled that there is some reasonable, real teaching on the web about Pit Bulls and other dogs that can be aggressive. I had a German Shepard that I raised with love and care, but who was still a dominant biter. He bit both of my sons in the face over food. I didn’t take action, though I did take him back to the Humane Society where I had gotten him. They couldn’t help me. I tried to keep him under control, but a neighbor boy was over one day and my youngest son opened the door not paying attention to Forrest being there and that dog shot out of the door and bit the neighbor boy through the hand. My husband and I went outside to stop the attack and my husband grabbed Forrest and the dog opened up my husband’s forearm with his teeth.

    I always thought it was how you raised them, but the signs of aggression were there and I just didn’t want to deal with it. I had Forrest put down after he bit the neighbor boy and I will never have another dog that is in the “aggressive” category. These dogs are beautiful animals, but they are not meant to be house pets and we, as human beings, need to be responsible and pay attention to what nature has taught us over and over about dogs from these breeds.

    My son gets a hard time at school for espousing the belief that we do about dogs from aggressive breeds. But, we know first hand and have even had the neighbors Pit Bull dogs being aggressive with a young man riding his bike down the street. I knew the dogs were out because they were in my yard barking at my little dog. I went outside, though I was not about to try to corral those dogs alone. Then the teenager on the bike came riding down the bike trail across the street. The two Pit Bulls saw him and immediately started following him. When he got in front of the house where the Pit Bulls live, the tan and white one got in front of him and the black and white one got behind him. The kid stopped his bike and looked at me. I started talking and telling him that I had never seen them attack, but I know that what they were doing to him was aggression. The kid slowly walked his bike over to me while I continued to talk to him. As he got to me, I called to Repo and while the dogs were distracted with me, the young man was able to ride away in the opposite direction form the one he was going. When I called the police, the other neighbors shamed me. I started looking for answers.

    I came across Dogsbite.org and I found Daxton’s story. I told my son about what I have learned and he understands about dangerous dogs. He told a classmate that what he has learned about Pit Bulls, but the child didn’t believe him. We get told that it’s the owner, not the dog breed and the usual nanny dog nonsense. I know what I saw and I know that we were lucky that those pits didn’t attack. I had a cell phone and there would have been nothing I could have done. I would love to say that I believed that the owner of the dogs is going to do the responsible thing and install a dog run that the dogs cannot escape from, but I don’t think that she will do so. I have told my children that if they see those dogs out of their fence, they are to go inside and call the police immediately.

    Your doing a public service and telling the truth about very dangerous animals. People need to hear the truth instead of the myth and they need to understand the risk that goes along with having these types of dogs in one’s home and neighborhood. I have learned first hand that to be a responsible neighbor means not bringing in a dog that is capable of harming them in any way. That is our duty and one that we should take seriously. I failed and a child got hurt. We were really lucky that a bite on the hand was all that happened. Never again.

  • jill hadfield

    I am sorry for your loss but you are wrong to outline these dogs as the only ones being potentially dangerous you are basing this on your own bad experience where if any dog is brought up properly you won’t have any problems statisticly the pit bull has been rated 2nd best dog for showing the lowest type of aggression and to be one of the best around kids that being said no child should ever be left alone with ANY breed of dog.

    • Karen

      Regarding Jill’s comments. This child was not left alone. In fact he was in the arms of his caregiver when they were attacked by the caregiver’s dogs. The dogs, if I am not mistaken had been in her home since birth and the parents were cautious around the dogs and so was the caregiver.

      All they are trying to do with this site is honor their child and prevent the same tragedy from repeating itself. Unfortunately many have “Drunk the Kool-Aid” of the pit bull/pit bull mix as being safe as a family dog, though statistics bear out that it is not. In my experience no amount of evidence seems to deter those who own them because organizations like The Humane Society of the United States perpetuate the myth of their safety.

      Now his parents live with a terrible loss and I am sure the caregiver feels guilt although I do not think she did anything wrong. They are courageous in setting up this site.

      • Daxtons Friends Post author

        Beyond the Interview: Essay of a Fatal Pit Bull Mauling

        What began as a moderate follow up post to the June 10th interview turned into an 8,500 word essay documenting the fatal pit bull mauling of Daxton Borchardt. Over the past six weeks, Jeff and Susan shared many details with DogsBite.org through phone conversations and emails about what transpired on March 6th. They also shared their histories about the four months shadowing the young boy’s death. Both Jeff and Susan formerly believed, “It’s all how you raise them.”


    • Linda largo

      I agree. Just a few months ago, 2 shiba inus killed a brand new baby. Children have to be protected, and do not know how to behave around dogs. Labs have killed and even eaten a baby. People are ultimately responsible.

      • Toni P.


        Your comment about “protecting” children and the death caused by the Shiba Inus does not even make sense. You state that children “do not know how to behave around dogs” and then mention the Shibas killed a “brand new baby”. A brand new baby is not even mobile and do not have the ability to have good or bad behavior around dogs. The father fell asleep on the couch with the baby and the incident had nothing to do with the child’s behavior with the dogs. I agree that the father was “ultimately” responsible for the situation. He made a poor choice, but he did not raise or train the dogs to kill his baby. This was a preventable situation. Other dog breed choices often launch attacks that are completely out of the parent’s control. Little Dax was pulled from the arms of an adult. Do I think the Shibas could have pulled the baby from the father’s arms and the father being wide awake could not fend off the dogs and save the baby?, absolutely not. You are trying to compare completely different situations.

    • Sonya Cerezo

      If that is true, why then do pitbulls have the highest attack rates? And why are there many attacks by well raised and lived family pet pitbulls? It has already been proven time and time again that well raised dogs with inherent aggressive traits can/will/have attack(ed).

      • Linda largo

        Labs have a higher bite rate than pit bulls, and need to be added to this lest. They are HUNTING dogs, and have high prey drive.
        Lets be real, is this a site to educate people with children are what? People think labs are mellow, and they are not, they tend to be hyper.

      • Krista Barnes

        Where are these stats from? between 2000-2009 there were only 256 fatalities and the stats I read showed they were from various breeds and breed was not an identifying factor or predictor. However almost 85% were not fixed (neutered/spayed). That seems to mirror the stats I used to collect.

        I’m just curious if they are from a reliable source or not. I would like to look at them more closely.

    • Louie Llipps

      You are very ignorant. Just read the stats, facts, and stories, instead of trying to spread lie’s about pitbulls. Pitbulls attack, maul, maim, and kill more than all other breeds combined. How can you try to say they do not?

    • Toni P.

      The information in the dog biographies on the Daxton’s Friends website is not based on the bad experience of any one person. They are written based off my 15 years working professionally in the animal field as well as my colleagues, who all have been in the animal field for over 20-40 years. Victims do not participate in the content of the bios or any of the other dog related information.