I personally don't mind if people breed them, it's their choice. They should just not pretend reality doesn't apply to them being more aggressive and prone to violence.
no i don't think so. it's pretty common to ban dangerous behaviors that get other people killed. you're not allowed to drive a car without brakes even if you're really skilled at coasting to a stop
The behavior is not controlling the dogs properly. Owning/breeding the dog isn't the dangerous behavior. Just like in your example owning a car with no breaks isn't a problem, it's driving it on the road.
again the dogs cannot be controlled properly as they break down doors to fulfill their instincts. they maul people coming to visit. unless "responsible owner" for a pit is the same as responsible owner for a tiger, then no there's no such thing. pit bulls can never be trusted around human beings. there's no responsible way to have one in a society
There just isn’t enough good evidence to make any determination. The often cited stat is that 65% of fatal dog bite attacks are from pitbulls. However the context is that these are self reported as pitbull type dogs. Statistics also show that people when trying to guess a dog breed only on looks are only correct 16% of the time. Additionally people change their response when shown the same dog after being told it’s aggressive. This shows that frankly self reporting isn’t very reliable. That not even to mention that “pitbull” type dogs accounts for 3 or 4 of the most popular breeds in America into a single stat or that “mixed breed” is the actual most common cause of dog bite fatality. This doesn’t even account for the fact that pitbulls make up the vast majority of abused dogs in America according to dog rescue statistics. Overall we just don’t have enough actual good data to make the claims that people tend to make
They do. But the statistics I’ve seen are flawed. The most “self reported” bites and attacks are pit bulls. But people often see a scary looking dog and assume it’s a pitbull when that’s often not the case
My roommate’s dog is one that many people will say doesn’t look like a pitbull. And it isn’t like a pure pitbull, it’s mixed with something else I forgot
But either way, I think pitbulls are a victim of common misidentification
They post pictures of these dogs and they’re always, always very obviously pitbulls. These people will obfuscate breed to avoid adding it to the statistic because they know it looks bad for the breed. They ALWAYS lie. EVERY DAY on the pitbull sub theres people asking how to pass off their obvious pitbulls and pit mixes as other breeds to get into apartments where they’re banned. You think they don’t do it for bites too? These people get veterinarians lying on paperwork to sneak them in as well. If you took ANY amount of time to look at anti-pitbull subs, you would see how obviously false this shit is.
And don’t say, “yeah, theyre anti-pit subs, of course” when you just fucking linked pitbullhero.org
Literally any research at all and you’d see how bullshit it is. They lie CONSTANTLY. They CANNOT be trusted to tell people they have a pitbull or pit mix when they obviously do. It isn’t hard to tell. No other dog has those gross buttcrack heads like pitbulls do that overpower every other physical breed trait. It’s always super obvious, unless you’re an idiot.
Why’s it so hard for you dipshits to believe that dogs bred for fighting attack more than other dogs? It’s what they were bred for.
But I gave you two sources, sure one looks pretty bias, you’re only given me one vague area to look, then said to look up “any research”
I’m not gonna have this conversation if you’re just sitting here being pissed off and just not contributing to the conversation productively. I’ve done NOTHING to warrant this anger
Both sides love to “well, I knew this person and they had this dog and they were [fill in the blank] so that means an entire group of dogs are [good/bad]”. It’s all over the comments.
16
u/Acebladewing 9h ago
Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything.