10 ms·

pit bulls are dangerous dogs, unlike most other breeds. source: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pitbull+attack https://www.youtube.com/results?se

pit bulls are dangerous dogs, unlike most other breeds. source: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pitbull+attack https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pitbull+attack Edit: https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2019.php https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2019... 69% of fatalities due to dog bites were caused by the same breed.

leetcrew 6y ago
pretty much any large dog can seriously fuck you up if they have a mind to. I've seen a chesapeake bay retriever crush a deer's head with his jaws. in the vast majority of cases, a properly socialized dog will not attack a human unprovoked.
- sn_master 6y ago
  I only mentioned pit bulls because OP said that shelter had 130 unadopted pit bulls. Whether or not they're statistically more aggressive than other dogs of the same size and socialization, that's a debate that'll get me a ton of downvotes here regardless of how I answer, so I'll pass on that one.
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    You would get less down votes if you make substantial arguments as people will be more apt to engage in discussion instead of down voting and moving on.
    - sn_master 6y ago
      I shared a YouTube link with hundreds of videos of pitbull attacks caught on camera. Watching one or two of those videos should constitute a substantial argument if someone has an open mind. From experience, I can spend a solid hour writing arguments and I'll get downvoted anyway by all the SJWs here who refuse to accept anything differing from they believe in. Even if one person decides to watch any of those videos and changes their mind about getting a pitbull I'll be happy for saving a life and I don't give a damn about downvotes.
      - leetcrew 6y ago
        there are almost 80 million dogs in america. linking a video with hundreds of pitbull attacks is not much better than just saying your neighbor has one and it's mean. the margin for error is probably higher with a lab or golden retriever, but it's irresponsible to own any large dog without committing to proper training and socialization. any large dog can maim or kill a human if provoked.
        sn_master 6y ago
        There is a reason BSLs exist. Scientists in those countries have decided pitbulls in particular are statistically more dangerous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breed-specific_legislation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breed-specific_legislation Please be cautious before getting a pit bull yourself or for a loved one. I don't see this discussion moving forward regardless of whatever evidence I present. God bless, have a great holiday.
        michaelmrose 6y ago
        Breed specific legislation depends on the argument that certain breeds are more dangerous. It's illogical to posit this is so because the legislation exists its circular.
        sn_master 6y ago
        What are you even saying? Scientists use statistics from hospitals. They find that 90% of brutal gruesome deaths are caused by one breed or variation of such breed, they ban that breed from being adopted. Result? 90% less gruesome bloody murders of innocent children and elderly -> success, the law is here to stay! Where is the "illogical" or "circular" part? I don't understand what those words have to do here. Do you like to allow poisonous snakes and tigers to be owned by the general population without any special license and guards too?
        michaelmrose 6y ago
- Fezzik 6y ago
  Pretty much any mammal that is around 40+ lbs could seriously fuck that unarmed human up if it wanted or needed to. You’re not winning a hand-to-hoof fight with a deer or a mountain goat. The fact is that pit bulls are responsible for the super-majority of dog-attack-caused fatalities, at least in the USA: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in... Over a 30+ year span, pit bulls were responsible for 3,397 attacks where the breed was able to be identified, nearly 7 times as many as the next most aggressive breed: https://maxlawsc.com/dog-bite-statistics/ https://maxlawsc.com/dog-bite-statistics/ Edited for clarity
  - perardi 6y ago
    Ha, 40 pounds? My dad ended up in the hospital because of an antibiotic-resistant infection from…our 12-pound cat named Mittens.
    - jeromenerf 6y ago
      I had kind of the same treatment from a mild injury as I was rescuing a starved kitten from a sewer!@#
  - rootusrootus 6y ago
    > around 40+ lbs Hell, I wouldn't even bet on a human against a properly motivated 15 pound house cat.
    - antisthenes 6y ago
      Especially if the cat rolls a 20 and crits... You better have 16+ CON!
  - Hnrobert42 6y ago
    The study to which you refer is based on citations in newspapers as found by Animals 24-7. Animals 24-7 describes itself as “ ANIMALS 24-7 is especially noted for our in-depth coverage of attacks by pit bulls, other dangerous dogs...”. Who knows how much their bias affected their “study,” but I wouldn’t rely on it for the basis of my argument.
bpodgursky 6y ago
The weaker version of this argument which is less likely to be downvoted is, "A huge fraction of the pit bulls which are currently in shelters are not compatible with most homes who want to adopt dogs" Pit bulls, whether or not they are inherently aggressive (and let's be honest, you get more aggressive pit bulls than Golden Retrievers), can do a HUGE amount of damage when they are. Adopting a dog which can't be trusted around kids, much less other dogs (which is REALLY common for pets which end up in shelters), is simply a non-starter for many families, and I don't think it's reasonable to expect otherwise.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  Do you have any data to back up inherent breed based aggression by pit bulls?
  - sn_master 6y ago
    https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2019.php https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2019... Says Pit Bulls are responsible for 69% of the fatalities (not just of all attacks).
    - michaelmrose 6y ago
      This is a terrible source. Please see. https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ Personally I prefer the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Dog Breeders Association to a single biased source that is basically the qanon of breed specific legislation. The only reason that I have slightly more respect for dogsbite is at least dogs actually have teeth whereas the pizza place in fact did not have a basement.
      - denimnerd42 6y ago
        You link a pitbull lobbying group as defense? There are plenty of pit bull lobbies. Most of them come from no-kill background because pitbulls are the most common dogs in shelters. There is no national register for dog bites. You can see how coronavirus tracking goes to show how much of a feat that would be. All you can do is track evidence in newspapers and in online media. Interview ER docs, plastic surgeons, etc.
michaelmrose 6y ago
Please don't post a url corresponding to a search of YouTube videos as if it were a source backing up your argument.
- sn_master 6y ago
  The hundreds of videos of the said dogs attacking people, the detailed news reports and expert interviews are not a source to back an argument?
  - t-writescode 6y ago
    Whether or not the message you’re sharing is true, the plural of anecdote is not data; and the only solution you find acceptable is the ending of hundreds of thousands of animals’ lives, many of whom have done nothing wrong.
    - sn_master 6y ago
      since when not having dogs breed became the same as killing them?!
      - t-writescode 6y ago
        Related question: you have a bunch of dogs that you believe shouldn't be allowed to be around. What do you do with them? Further, if it's illegal for anyone to buy them, what do you do with them?
        sn_master 6y ago
        Are you serious? The UK had the same problem when they banned pit bulls. Not a single dog was killed. They just disallowed people from getting new dogs, and the ones that already existed just died out of old age in their existing homes. If new dogs are found they just go to an animal shelter where they get neutered and that's it. In some cases, like the US, unwanted (but legal) dogs go to Canada where they get new homes. Checkout YouTube for that, they all look like happy puppies. Not a single breed-specific-legislation in the world resulted in any dogs getting killed. What we're talking about here, is dog breed which single handedly are responsible for over 90% of fatalities and serious injuries should be neutered and not allowed to be sold to the general public. They can be in shelters, as guard dogs or used by the police or military, just not regular family homes with elderly and children who can't defend themselves. Where did you get that gruesome idea of killing dogs from?! No one anywhere in the world has done that or even talked about it.
michaelmrose 6y ago
This is a terrible source. Please see. https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ Personally I prefer the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Dog Breeders Association to a single biased source that is basically the qanon of breed specific legislation. The only reason that I have slightly more respect for dogsbite is at least dogs actually have teeth whereas the pizza place in fact did not have a basement.
perardi 6y ago
“Pit bull” isn’t even a coherent concept; it a loose term for a constellation of terrier and bulldog breeds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull
- denimnerd42 6y ago
  And most of those types of dogs are not good family dogs. Dog aggression, resource guarding, strength, high pain tolerance, bred to fight literal bulls, etc. I can share some outcomes of their mauling on little children and the elderly if you would like.
  - sn_master 6y ago
    Unfortunately, shelters use that loose definition idea and try to pass them off as other breeds to unsuspecting families. https://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/03/18/Many-shelter-dogs-mislabeled-pit-bulls/stories/201203180054 https://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/03/18/Many-shelter-do...
- sn_master 6y ago
  If you bring any group of people and show them a variation of dogs and ask which ones are "pit bull", 95%+ of them will agree on the same dogs. Just because its multiple breeds doesn't make it an "incoherent concept". DNA tests exist for dogs now, same like humans, and can unambiguously find if a dog is a pitbull mix.
linuxftw 6y ago
You'll never convince the pit bull apologists. Polite society has decided that they're not going to hear about it because it goes against their intuition that no dogs are 'bad.' I have some friends that have pit bulls. They never attacked a person, but they did attempt to kill a goat. I can't think of another type of dog that would maul livestock unprovoked with no history of aggression. They are just naturally aggressive, and anyone that says otherwise is a shill or ignorant.

leetcrew 6y ago

pretty much any large dog can seriously fuck you up if they have a mind to. I've seen a chesapeake bay retriever crush a deer's head with his jaws. in the vast majority of cases, a properly socialized dog will not attack a human unprovoked.

sn_master 6y ago
I only mentioned pit bulls because OP said that shelter had 130 unadopted pit bulls. Whether or not they're statistically more aggressive than other dogs of the same size and socialization, that's a debate that'll get me a ton of downvotes here regardless of how I answer, so I'll pass on that one.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  You would get less down votes if you make substantial arguments as people will be more apt to engage in discussion instead of down voting and moving on.
  - sn_master 6y ago
    I shared a YouTube link with hundreds of videos of pitbull attacks caught on camera. Watching one or two of those videos should constitute a substantial argument if someone has an open mind. From experience, I can spend a solid hour writing arguments and I'll get downvoted anyway by all the SJWs here who refuse to accept anything differing from they believe in. Even if one person decides to watch any of those videos and changes their mind about getting a pitbull I'll be happy for saving a life and I don't give a damn about downvotes.
    - leetcrew 6y ago
      there are almost 80 million dogs in america. linking a video with hundreds of pitbull attacks is not much better than just saying your neighbor has one and it's mean. the margin for error is probably higher with a lab or golden retriever, but it's irresponsible to own any large dog without committing to proper training and socialization. any large dog can maim or kill a human if provoked.
      - sn_master 6y ago
        There is a reason BSLs exist. Scientists in those countries have decided pitbulls in particular are statistically more dangerous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breed-specific_legislation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breed-specific_legislation Please be cautious before getting a pit bull yourself or for a loved one. I don't see this discussion moving forward regardless of whatever evidence I present. God bless, have a great holiday.
        michaelmrose 6y ago
        Breed specific legislation depends on the argument that certain breeds are more dangerous. It's illogical to posit this is so because the legislation exists its circular.
        sn_master 6y ago
        What are you even saying? Scientists use statistics from hospitals. They find that 90% of brutal gruesome deaths are caused by one breed or variation of such breed, they ban that breed from being adopted. Result? 90% less gruesome bloody murders of innocent children and elderly -> success, the law is here to stay! Where is the "illogical" or "circular" part? I don't understand what those words have to do here. Do you like to allow poisonous snakes and tigers to be owned by the general population without any special license and guards too?
        michaelmrose 6y ago
Fezzik 6y ago
Pretty much any mammal that is around 40+ lbs could seriously fuck that unarmed human up if it wanted or needed to. You’re not winning a hand-to-hoof fight with a deer or a mountain goat. The fact is that pit bulls are responsible for the super-majority of dog-attack-caused fatalities, at least in the USA: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in... Over a 30+ year span, pit bulls were responsible for 3,397 attacks where the breed was able to be identified, nearly 7 times as many as the next most aggressive breed: https://maxlawsc.com/dog-bite-statistics/ https://maxlawsc.com/dog-bite-statistics/ Edited for clarity
- perardi 6y ago
  Ha, 40 pounds? My dad ended up in the hospital because of an antibiotic-resistant infection from…our 12-pound cat named Mittens.
  - jeromenerf 6y ago
    I had kind of the same treatment from a mild injury as I was rescuing a starved kitten from a sewer!@#
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  > around 40+ lbs Hell, I wouldn't even bet on a human against a properly motivated 15 pound house cat.
  - antisthenes 6y ago
    Especially if the cat rolls a 20 and crits... You better have 16+ CON!
- Hnrobert42 6y ago
  The study to which you refer is based on citations in newspapers as found by Animals 24-7. Animals 24-7 describes itself as “ ANIMALS 24-7 is especially noted for our in-depth coverage of attacks by pit bulls, other dangerous dogs...”. Who knows how much their bias affected their “study,” but I wouldn’t rely on it for the basis of my argument.

bpodgursky 6y ago

The weaker version of this argument which is less likely to be downvoted is, "A huge fraction of the pit bulls which are currently in shelters are not compatible with most homes who want to adopt dogs" Pit bulls, whether or not they are inherently aggressive (and let's be honest, you get more aggressive pit bulls than Golden Retrievers), can do a HUGE amount of damage when they are. Adopting a dog which can't be trusted around kids, much less other dogs (which is REALLY common for pets which end up in shelters), is simply a non-starter for many families, and I don't think it's reasonable to expect otherwise.

michaelmrose 6y ago
Do you have any data to back up inherent breed based aggression by pit bulls?
- sn_master 6y ago
  https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2019.php https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2019... Says Pit Bulls are responsible for 69% of the fatalities (not just of all attacks).
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    This is a terrible source. Please see. https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ Personally I prefer the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Dog Breeders Association to a single biased source that is basically the qanon of breed specific legislation. The only reason that I have slightly more respect for dogsbite is at least dogs actually have teeth whereas the pizza place in fact did not have a basement.
    - denimnerd42 6y ago
      You link a pitbull lobbying group as defense? There are plenty of pit bull lobbies. Most of them come from no-kill background because pitbulls are the most common dogs in shelters. There is no national register for dog bites. You can see how coronavirus tracking goes to show how much of a feat that would be. All you can do is track evidence in newspapers and in online media. Interview ER docs, plastic surgeons, etc.

michaelmrose 6y ago

Please don't post a url corresponding to a search of YouTube videos as if it were a source backing up your argument.

sn_master 6y ago
The hundreds of videos of the said dogs attacking people, the detailed news reports and expert interviews are not a source to back an argument?
- t-writescode 6y ago
  Whether or not the message you’re sharing is true, the plural of anecdote is not data; and the only solution you find acceptable is the ending of hundreds of thousands of animals’ lives, many of whom have done nothing wrong.
  - sn_master 6y ago
    since when not having dogs breed became the same as killing them?!
    - t-writescode 6y ago
      Related question: you have a bunch of dogs that you believe shouldn't be allowed to be around. What do you do with them? Further, if it's illegal for anyone to buy them, what do you do with them?
      - sn_master 6y ago
        Are you serious? The UK had the same problem when they banned pit bulls. Not a single dog was killed. They just disallowed people from getting new dogs, and the ones that already existed just died out of old age in their existing homes. If new dogs are found they just go to an animal shelter where they get neutered and that's it. In some cases, like the US, unwanted (but legal) dogs go to Canada where they get new homes. Checkout YouTube for that, they all look like happy puppies. Not a single breed-specific-legislation in the world resulted in any dogs getting killed. What we're talking about here, is dog breed which single handedly are responsible for over 90% of fatalities and serious injuries should be neutered and not allowed to be sold to the general public. They can be in shelters, as guard dogs or used by the police or military, just not regular family homes with elderly and children who can't defend themselves. Where did you get that gruesome idea of killing dogs from?! No one anywhere in the world has done that or even talked about it.

michaelmrose 6y ago

This is a terrible source. Please see. https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/ Personally I prefer the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Dog Breeders Association to a single biased source that is basically the qanon of breed specific legislation. The only reason that I have slightly more respect for dogsbite is at least dogs actually have teeth whereas the pizza place in fact did not have a basement.

perardi 6y ago

“Pit bull” isn’t even a coherent concept; it a loose term for a constellation of terrier and bulldog breeds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

denimnerd42 6y ago
And most of those types of dogs are not good family dogs. Dog aggression, resource guarding, strength, high pain tolerance, bred to fight literal bulls, etc. I can share some outcomes of their mauling on little children and the elderly if you would like.
- sn_master 6y ago
  Unfortunately, shelters use that loose definition idea and try to pass them off as other breeds to unsuspecting families. https://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/03/18/Many-shelter-dogs-mislabeled-pit-bulls/stories/201203180054 https://www.toledoblade.com/local/2012/03/18/Many-shelter-do...
sn_master 6y ago
If you bring any group of people and show them a variation of dogs and ask which ones are "pit bull", 95%+ of them will agree on the same dogs. Just because its multiple breeds doesn't make it an "incoherent concept". DNA tests exist for dogs now, same like humans, and can unambiguously find if a dog is a pitbull mix.

linuxftw 6y ago

You'll never convince the pit bull apologists. Polite society has decided that they're not going to hear about it because it goes against their intuition that no dogs are 'bad.' I have some friends that have pit bulls. They never attacked a person, but they did attempt to kill a goat. I can't think of another type of dog that would maul livestock unprovoked with no history of aggression. They are just naturally aggressive, and anyone that says otherwise is a shill or ignorant.