Unsafe at any speed and pit bull comparo

         John Bullerjahn March 24, 2014 at 02:19 PM What is very interesting to me is that when people talk/debate about pit bulls, there is no mid ground. They're either hated or can do no wrong. I will say I have been in contact with a pit bull who was more like a lap dog 'traditional' house pet. He seemed nice and gentle. Would I trust him? Not for a one second.

If you watch Judge Joe Brown, every time there is a case involving a pit bull or pit bull mix, he always brings up a chart with types of dogs and percentages of dogs that cause serious injuries or death. Guess what comes in at #1 by a wide margin?

When people say they are wonderful around children I cringe. I tell people when they tell that to me "Yes, well they're all wonderful and lovable until it comes back with the baby's head in it's mouth." Maybe pure bred, non mixed breed pit bulls ARE as wonderful as people say they are. However, the fact that the name pit bull comes up in so very many cases tells me that too many people are breeding them purposely to cause serious injuries.

I suppose there are going to be examples of the Devil's Spawn or a rogue example in almost every breed, but when someone mentions a Collie, Basset Hound or St. Bernard, the thought of them maiming, severely injuring or killing people doesn't even occur.

Now let's take a moment to talk about the much maligned Corvair. I'm not sure why the author of the orgingal article chose to compare pit bulls to Corvair's; it makes as much sense as comparing a Corgi to a 777 but it needs answering, so here goes.

The Corvair was not an unsafe or basically flawed car if you had the intelligence to realize it wasn't a Chevy Impala. They are completely different.

The American public in this case was the main culprit in the Corvair 'accidents' that Ralph Nader refers to in his book. The Corvair was a rear engine, rear wheel drive swing axle design. Not the first brand of that configuration. A certain German car loved by many comes to mind.

The Corvair had a fairly heavy flat 6 cylinder engine which made the ''swing' part more of a problem. A front anti roll bar or torsion bar would have helped the issue, but GM decided to cut costs in the early models and not install them. That, and the stupidity of the American public, made for the perfect storm.

A reasonable solution was found, but proved too difficult for the majority of American drivers to comprehend. Keep the tire pressures at the correct level at all times. As the owners manual of a car is the least read book in the world, how could it be anything but the manufacturer's fault.

What made this seemingly daunting task even more like the 12 labors of Hercules was that the front tires had a different PSI than the rear. Had one read the owners manual, people would have known that. For a population who only checks air pressure um, never, it was too much of a bother.

Nader somewhat delved into the Corvair issue, but one cannot condone making it an issue for his personal gain and notoriety. You will notice that nowhere does he mention anything about proper tire pressure. He's an opportunistic, greedy little man who creates, then feeds off people's fears.

The higher front pressures were supposed to compensate for the lack of a front roll bar which it did in a limited way, and the higher than normal rear PSI kept the sidewalls stiff so they wouldn't roll over on themselves if you had to make an evasive maneuver.

It should be noted that even with the front sway bars installed, the pressures still had to be monitored as the roll bar has nothing to do with the actual tire condition itself.

So comparing pit bulls to Corvair's is dumber than owing a pit. There's no logic to it. It's like trying to make a make a hedgehog into a fluffy white Angora cat. 

You can fix one danger mechanically once you know the root cause, but the dangers of an existing pit bull is something you can never fix, even knowing the root cause. 1 Recommended Delete⋅ Paula March 26, 2014 at 08:57 PM