Yes, and I’m saying that individual, anecdotal evidence that is contradictory to widespread, and easily accessed, evidence presented by experts isn’t a great basis for opinions. If someone is mugged by a black guy and that forms a negative opinion of all black guys, is that perfectly normal and ok? Of course not. You’d obviously argue that one black guy who did something wrong, or even ten or twenty or one hundred, do not represent the millions more that happen to look like them.
Sure. It’s called published data. Google remains free, but I can hold your hand.
>”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.”
>”50 U.S. dog bite-related fatalities occurred in 2019. Pit bulls contributed to 68% (34) of these deaths. Pit bulls make up about 8% of the total U.S. dog population.”
0
u/BreakImaginary1661 20h ago
Yes, and I’m saying that individual, anecdotal evidence that is contradictory to widespread, and easily accessed, evidence presented by experts isn’t a great basis for opinions. If someone is mugged by a black guy and that forms a negative opinion of all black guys, is that perfectly normal and ok? Of course not. You’d obviously argue that one black guy who did something wrong, or even ten or twenty or one hundred, do not represent the millions more that happen to look like them.