• lennybird@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    Too many dumbasses with Pitbulls as playthings makes up the majority of the problem. The vast majority of serious incidents with humans involve Pitbulls despite greater concentration of other breeds.

    In other words, Pitbulls haven’t been domesticated; or rather that breed is inherently aggressive. So sick of dumb owners who fall for the same ignorant trap that they’re different from the rest.

    • FirstPitchStrike@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Interestingly, AKC testing showed pitbulls to be among the best breeds with regard to temperament testing. They are large, strong, and often owned by bad people and bred and (not) trained irresponsibly, but there is nothing to suggest that any problems pitbulls have are systemic to the breed.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        For whatever reason, ER doctors and Trauma surgeons would beg to differ as to outcome on the front line; for, despite not being the most populous breed, they make up nearly 70% of all human attacks and 52% of all deaths, with the next breed being Rottweilers at only 10%.

        70%. Despite 6% of the dog population.

        Whether that’s a reflection of what I perceive as the oft copout, “it’s the owner,” that still begs the question of whether that risk is worth assuming for any owner, let alone the people surrounding the unregulated ownership of such an animal.

        Whether that’s owner negligence (even harder to evidence) or the dog breed, the end-result is the same: it’s a breed who exhibits by far the worst outcome.

        After all, isn’t it funny that all those irresponsible owners of other breeds don’t yield similar statistics with comparably-sized breeds…?

        In other words, (a) Is there evidence the owner of a Pitbull is inherently less responsible than an owner of a Rottweiler or a Doberman? I’ve seen no such evidence. (b) Is there a greater demand upon Pitbull owners to offset the risk to owning a Pitbull versus other breeds?

    • sizzler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I grew up around Staffordshire pitbulls who all pitbulls are decended from. To me for a long time they were what a dog was cos everyone had one. Loving, protective, social dogs that had bounds of energy. Even “owned” one for a short while and was comfortable enough to walk off lead with her. Her only problem was other dogs, couldn’t be around them really and saw them as a challenge which was frustrating cos of how amenable she was the rest of the time.

      As my previous comment goes, she would fall under beast and is better off as a working defence dog and not around people or other animals really. That’s the issue, people keeping dogs that are trained for purpose and then keeping them as pets without purpose.

      • lennybird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I largely agree with this. I simply think Pitbulls were bred with certain qualities that don’t take kindly to average urban lifestyles. My neighbor 3 doors down had 3 Pitbulls maul their golden retriever to death. Perfect example of what you said. Meanwhile the hospital nearby took a 2-year-old mauled by her own family’s Pitbulls a few years back. Anecdotes of course but that only corroborates the national statistics I already mentioned.

        The thing is, it’s almost always Pitbulls. Retrievers retrieve. Pointers point. Shepherds herd. Pitbulls fight.

        I say that as someone who was hospitalized by a German Shepherd for 2 days when I was 12 lol. The only dog I am more cautious with than a Pitbull is a shar pei. Whew… Bred to be imperial guard dogs… I knew one for years and I had very close calls with it.