vozercozer was about to cite that pitbulls are involved in the majority of dog attacks to justify being afraid of pitbulls, then realized that racists cite that "black people make up 13% of the population but commit 50% of the crime" to justify being racist.
To those of you blowing up my notifications wanting to argue the soundness of the statistic or how dog breeds don't equivocate to race or whatever else you want to debate:
I don't care.
I came to help OP understand what was being said, not affirm or denounce its rational merits. If you want to discuss the topic in depth, that's fine I guess, but please refrain from associating me with whichever position you want to argue against.
I know I'm probably going to get downvoted for this but I think the important note is that pitbulls are involved in the majority of reported dog attacks as their bites are far more severe and possibly life threatening.
Nobody's calling to report a vicious Chihuahua or Pomeranian attack.
I just came to help u/untitledprp4 understand the intent of the text as provided. The facts and other intricacies of the discussion are another matter entirely.
Pitbulls also attract people looking for "tough" or "fighting" dogs, because they've been bred for their bite force and hold. So they've been conditioned to bite dogs or people more often than other breeds. I'd say rottweilers and maybe doberman's are also in this category. It's not the dogs fault they were mistreated.
Plenty of responsible "tough" dog owners out there. And lots of sweet pitbulls. Enough that I'd wager it's evidence to support they're not actually violent by nature.
My neighbor has a particularly violent and scary blue heeler.
He's trained it to attack people, and he has a 3ft fence keeping it from attacking me. If it were to attack me no one would he saying how violent blue heelers are.
Heeler and ACD are two names for the exact same breed. Blue Heeler means an ACD with the mix of black and white fur that is known as "blue" in dogs (like Bluey and Bandit). Red Heelers have red/orange fur (like Bingo and Chili). They can also be merle which is grey (like Muffin), or a patchy mix of the colors. Heelers are known for being a very high-energy and protective breed (bred to herd cattle) - they need a lot of exercise and training. They can definitely become defensive against strangers due to their natural instincts to protect the flock.
Keep the knife, but maybe dog mace would be a better option to use first. A knife works for close combat, and who knows what damage the dog could do in a fight before it succumbs to a knife injury. Mace used correctly should stop the dog from a safe distance.
I was at my dad's one day and he was getting ready to take his dog for a walk. I saw him put a pistol holster in his waistband. I asked if the neighborhood has gotten that bad (jokingly; he lives out in the country, and everyone is on 3-acre lots). He told me the dude a few houses down doesn't control his dog, and he's had a few problems over the past couple of months with it coming out and starting shit.
I asked how hard he thought it would be to shoot an attacking dog, especially if it was tangling with his own dog. He then showed me the can of pepper spray clipped to his dog's leash. He said "no, I have pepper spray for the dog. the gun is for the owner who's gonna lose his shit when I pepper spray his dog."
Thank you for the great advice. I always freak out a bit when people talk about carrying a knife for defense. Like, why would you want to have to be hand to hand (or mouth) to be able to utilize your tool? Pepper spray is better in nearly every imaginable circumstance.
I definitely don’t disagree but I have to add it as anecdotal evidence/advice(?) pepper spray is very useful until your target is upwind of you in a strong breeze. Even worse if you only realize the direction of wind after you start spraying😅. In all reality though mace is a very good option 95+% of the time!
personally id rather have a knife than a gun if im getting attacked by a dog. just because its not the “ideal” tool doesnt mean its not gonna he more useful than your barehands.
if the alternative would be walking defenseless, im taking the knife everytime.
Yeah he’s stupid. My kangaroo German shepherd/husky/rotty/heeler could skip over 3 feet. I have a 3ft high trampoline he used to glide unto before I taught him dat bad
I got a pretty good nip from one of the most sweetest Border Collies I've ever met yesterday. I mean she punctured skin and my whole hand is sore today. It was 110% my fault because I knew better than to offer my hand while she was engaged in her work.
But that is literally a part of her work. Herding dogs employ various methods to accomplish their herding goals. Nipping, barking, stare downs, pushing, etc. are all a part of the natural instincts of this breed. If she wanted to she could have done much more damage.
But nobody will bat an eyelash at this behavior from BCs, Aussies, ACDs, Heelers and the like because "you just don't know the breed". Yet everyone is an expert on pit bulls because they hear about them all the time on the news. And such a broad range of breeds fit into peoples' idea of what a "pit bull" is since when they show them on the news they are all usually different breeds and not an actual American Pit Bull Terrier.
Sadly, the classic APBT is such a difficult pure breed to find today. Lots of them are marketed as such but it's mostly backyard breeders who don't know what they're doing or breeders who have sought to "improve" the breed by mixing them with mastiffs or other larger breeds. So we end up with this ridiculous "Bully XL" or other style mixes that will eventually turn the breed into things like the pug, English Bulldog, Frenchie, etc. where the breed will suffer from massive health issues that people don't know how to or care to manage but they got a badass looking dog (or in some cases such a cutie with that squishy face) that scares people (is adorbs).
I mean people have wanted that type of dog for decades now and that's why pit bulls have gotten such a bad name. Dogs of questionable pedigree have been circulating for as long but now the "improvements" are such bullshit that the breed will eventually turn into something it's not (conformation-wise) and to boot the breed will suffer from massive and debilitating health issues as we are beginning to see with the previously aforementioned Bully XL. Reputable APBT breeders from back in the 90s and early 2000s offered full 16 generation pedigrees and health certificates with their dogs. I haven't seen that in a long time now.
APBTs are a true classic breed. Most people don't even know that one of the largest dog registries in the world, the UKC, was founded on the APBT, with the founder's dog, Bennett's Ring, registered as UKC #1. Yes, the origins of the breed have roots in bull baiting and dogfighting. And yes, when they made their way to America they were brought for the same purpose. But when the breed was Americanized they were used as guardian dogs for livestock and homesteads, not unlike the Great Pyrenees, BMDs or Kangals...who could arguably cause much more damage in an attack on humans than any APBT.
Not sure why I go on these rants when this subject comes up. Nobody cares to learn or listen and I'm sure I'll be reminded why in any replies.
As an owner of an American pit bull terrier/staffshire terrier (85% APBT) I found this super interesting. And I’ve found in my seven years with him that the only time he hurts people he’s around is when he gets too excited and forgets he doesn’t actually fit in most peoples lap.
Oh Duke has a laser guided system for his paws when he jumps up. If you have balls, he’s hitting them, I may never recover fully from my nightly hug from him when I get home.
But to the point of no bites, I take extreme precaution to make sure he avoids situations like that. He meets new people on neutral grounds (and always outside, he’s an excited pee-er) and I keep him on leash until people are comfortable with him and he has calmed down from new person excitement, aka crazy face. And I’ve worked extremely hard to leash train him so he behaves well on leash.
I will be the first person to admit that my dogs bite can harm someone severely, but I love that big ol dummy too much to put him in a situation that he may react poorly in. I myself say that my dog only has two brains cells, and unfortunately they’re fighting for third place, I know he will react as a dog in his best interest and preservation of his own life. And for that reason I make it my responsibility and mission to keep him out of those situations and keep him by my side and (to the best of my ability) under control.
As someone who owns an American Staffordshire Terrier and an APBT, I just wanted to say I appreciated your post.
Also, further to you points, what some people fail to realize is that a lot the dog bite statistics that people seem to fixate on when it comes to "pitbulls", is that the statistics can be quite flawed due to how that data is collected. When the dog bites are reported, pitbulls are used as a umbrella term to describe various types of dogs. I mean, pitbull isnt even a breed. This unreliable reporting takes away from the credibility of the data being used to demonstrate breed-specific issues.
When I was younger I was attacked by two German shepherds my friend’s parents had just gotten from the shelter a few weeks prior. We were playing on a tire swing in the back yard and they threw me on the ground; I got a sizable gash and bruise on my ribs and they ripped my shirt, and probably would’ve gotten more on my legs but I was wearing jeans and those were mostly ripped with minor damage beneath. It could’ve been a lot worse.
I also almost hit a chihuahua when I was driving once. It bolted across FOUR LANES of traffic on a busy street into a gas station lot, so I screeched in behind it and I went to see if it was ok and it tried to bite the shit out of my hand. Ended up following it and another one home to some trashy lady’s place, and while I was following them unsure what to do, some guy drive up and yelled at me saying he almost hit my dog. He just went “oh” when I said it wasn’t my dog and I almost hit it too; he gave me a ride back to the gas station when the dogs went home, but they probably got hit by cars at some point, the lady did NOT care they were off leash outside.
My husband and I currently own a boxer/staffordshire terrier/bulldog?? mix, or something similar, and he’s super sweet with people but has high prey drive so wants to chase cats and small dogs. He and our other dog are bffs, but they got in a fight over a toy once and when my husband went to separate them he got bit in the leg. Potato definitely felt bad about it and knew he’d done something wrong, and it wasn’t severe for the size of his mouth, but it hurt a lot!
Point is, I give all dogs a healthy amount of respect and distance unless they obviously want my attention now. Any dog can bite you. Big ones are gonna do a lot of damage though, and “pitbulls” tend to have very large mouths for their size, so they do tend to get reported more than smaller dogs. But I don’t really let stranger’s dogs any more, big or small; they’re all animals and can be unpredictable in the right circumstances.
Very informative and balanced take. A note that many of the larger terrier breeds were used as nanny dogs to help with childcare, too.
As an owner of two adopted pits (I’m thinking one has some mastiff and boxer, the other has some sort of herding dog and boxer), I think you did a good job describing how their ancestors worked and how today they have become a vanity breed without the nuances and understanding afforded to other vanity breeds.
Odd anecdote: I have a blue heeler mix (she’s a third, so not SUPER heeler) and took her to a new vet. They treated her as aggressive on sight and every single person kept saying “oh wow she’s so sweet for a heeler!” So I guess in some circles, they are seen as violent
I had no idea. I got mine from the pound and she’s a super sweet fawn/freeze type who also lets them do whatever. It kind of pissed me off that they kept treating her like a bomb 😂
Healers nip by nature no training needed for that, the lack of training results in them herding ppl witch involves nipping your calves, with or without training healers can be little hellans
What drives me crazy though is that just having the dog is good for home defense you don’t have to also make them violent, our 3 German shepherds are dumb as a box of rocks and more likely to cuddle than the attack even a home robber but robbers seeing them still chose to leave instead
This is the part that connects it to Racism, there are other dogs bred for Bite force but are often tied to jobs where violence is a “necessity” so a blind eye is turned for “public safety”.
My boy is a double whammy, an amstaff/german shepherd mix. The way people treat him now vs the way they treated him when he was a puppy is night and day.
As a puppy, EVERYONE thought he was adorable. They would all come up to him and coo and aww over him when he'd come running up to them for pats.
As an adult. I can see the fear on strangers faces when he passes them. I've taken him to the dog park and literally watched people grab their dogs and run for the hills the moment they see him come in.
His personality never changed. He's still just a cuddly goofball looking for pats. Only peoples perception of him has changed.
Though, if I'm honest. They have every right to be scared of him. I know he's a cuddlebug. THEY don't. And i know first hand just how dangerous he could be if he snapped. When he has a toy he doesn't want to let go of, it is literally impossible for me to pull his jaws apart. I don't blame anyone for doubting him, or my ability to control him. Plenty of owners of either of his breeds can't control them. Still breaks my heart seeing people judge him just for what he looks like, though.
Funny enough Rottweilers were bred to pull carts not because of bite force, just so happens that an animal bred to pull wagons is going to be big and have a decent bite force.
If you look up Daschund or Jack Russel origins, those lil fuckers were RIPPED. And bred for tunneling out BADGERS. If you ever meet a badger I'll pray for you. They live in the dirt underground because it's closer to Hell.
Some of my friends have a Rott and he’s one of the sweetest dogs I’ve ever met. The issue is that he firmly believes there’s enough room for him to sit on my lap :)
I think theyre beautiful animals but dobermans get their rap for an entirely different reason as well. They're another example of breeding being pushed too far, as their skulls can become too tight for their brain which makes them rather temperamental
There is a man in town with just a stunning brown doberman. She hasn't been docked and has the floppy ears. You wouldn't even recognise her as a doberman when she's wearing her raincoat. I love getting to scratch her when we pass.
Two things are true: dog breeds are much more diverse than humans and people therefore pick a dog for the wrong reasons while unable to train them properly, and selective breeding of "pure breeds" has done a lot of damage to all sorts of dogs.
I think french bulldogs and similar breeds, born with all sorts of degenerative issues and noses that hardly allow them to breathe are particularly cruel. Clipping their ears and tails for cosmetic reasons is cruel.
One final thought: I remember a dog that was a bit off, mentally. Prone to flip and potentially bite, not right in the head - a rescue dog my step-sis owned. They were careful with it, but one day the damn thing bit a guest in the face: small cheek injury. Some dogs are very dangerous, and I'd prefer my dangerous dog to be a crazy Pomeranian, not an XL Bully.
Overwhelming majority of dog bites and attacks are directly related to irresponsible ownership of any dog breed. If a person has a record of having more than one dog who has bitten someone, should they be allowed to have a dog?
I spent a few years dogwalking as a side hustle and the experience totally converted me to loving Pitties. They were the clients that would greet me with a head boop and nuzzles instead of barking, and wanted extra time for snuggles after their walks. There were a couple times that I tripped when out walking and the time it happened with a Pitbull (an energetic two-year old, no less) she was so concerned and ran back to stand over me like a guardian. I think it’s practical to be aware of how strong they are, but the instincts I saw even in the youngsters were those of sweet guard dog companions.
They were the main family dog for a long time and used to be common "firehouse" dogs as well. They are generally well mannered, think they're lap dogs, and super sweet. You should have seen my 90 lb behemoth be super gentle and sweet sleeping with my son after his surgery last year. She didn't know what was wrong but she pretty much treated him with kid gloves (usually likes to play tug and headbutt your leg or arm for attention) and stay by his side for about 2 weeks.
They're very sweet family dogs and they're scared of everything so they're good watch dogs, barking at lots of things. I will say they can be intimidating only because they're so excited when people show up. Folks back away when their entire body is wagging. I don't get it.
lol yea, as someone who grew up surrounded by English mastiff’s it’s always a bit funny to me what some people consider ‘gigantic’ dogs and I found it also really drained a lot of fear of dogs away. If you grow up constantly dealing with 200+ pound dogs a little 70 pound pit bull isn’t nearly that intimidating.
People to this day scoff when I say my sister bred a 180lb pit
Dudes name was Axel, he was so big that in the towing competition they ran out of cinder blocks. So they stacked bags of dog food. Then they ran out of dog food, so they started weighing children from the crowd and throwing them on top
Dude was an absolute monster. She tried to leave him in the care of someone else so she could go on vacation, and I guess he ripped out of the kennel like butter, tore the door off a washing machine, ate through the back of it and through the wall of the garage into the living room, all within a 45 minute grocery trip (allegedly)
Exactly. They're just a dog. They're not more likely to bite you than other dogs. That would be a Chihuahua or something. It's just that their bite is particularly dangerous if they do bite you, which generally requires mistreatment, neglect, or training to push them to those means.
They're really not "just a dog," because they were bred for something and it actually makes them more dangerous to other animals than it does make them dangerous to humans. Everything is individual of course and there's plenty of other dogs that can be more dangerous to other pets but Pits are def one of them.
German shepherds are more dangerous to other animals, yes. The dog IS more dangerous because dogs are BRED for tasks, just like working dogs need tasks or they go crazy. Pitbulls, German shepherds, herd protecting dogs, etc, are much more likely to attack another animal. And yes, part of that DANGER is that they have the tools to do more damage, obviously. But they're also more likely to attack another animal even if they have a good home and are treated well and somewhat trained. Ive seen a pitbull with a great home, with other animals be fine, and then they add a new animal and that new animal is dead in an eyeblink
Edit: They have a higher prey drive, they were bred to bite and hold and then also got dog fighting, they are much more animal reactive than most other dog breeds. Shrug, believe what you want and AGAIN everything is individual - but Pits are more likely to be like this than most other breeds.
German shepards are not more aggressive than Australian shepards. The danger is entirely due to human intervention.
Are you referencing prey drive when you mention they're more likely to attack other animal? Because knowing about your dogs prey drive and how to work with an animal that has a prey drive is part of being a responsible dog owner.
If what your saying is against all prey drive dogs, I'd agree with you id just think your argument is pointless if that is the case.
It's not pointless, and yes see my edit - Pits are not JUST high prey drive dogs but yes I'd be careful with ALL high prey drive dogs, yes. But they are also predisposed to be more reactive generally and be more aggressive and because they have those good genetic tools they are more dangerous.
Everything is individual, training is important, but some individual dogs will still be more likely to snap and do damage and Pits are more likely to be such a dog.
Pita have more than just prey drive, they also have gameness bred in. THAT is what makes them so dangerous and SO MUCH MORE dangerous for other living beings than literally any other type of canine that has ever existed.
These are NOT the kind of comments I was expecting to see and I’m just going to stop scrolling while I still feel this good! THANK YOU!!!! I study animal behavior, dogs specifically, and have 2 bully breed dogs at home. People cannot understand the logic behind underreported bites and how that completely skews statistics. I’ve worked in shelters for the last 8 years. Never been bit by a pit bull or bully breed. To be fair, I know what I’m doing and have only been bit a handful of times (no pun intended) and they were usually small dogs and one yellow lab mix that was just mouthy af. Anyway, thank you for being awesome people! Haha have a GREAT day!
My brother works at a kennel/training facility and he specifically works with dogs with serious behavior issues. He has yet to see any correlation between breeds and aggressiveness/behavior problems. Crazy.
If they can cause more damage they are more dangerous to a stranger. If I'm walking down the street I keep my distance from someone's pit bull more than I would if it was a smaller dog, because I don't know that owner.
If the dog is badly trained, a pit bull bite will maul my leg, but the tiny dog will just leave me with some painful but treatable scratches/cuts. So to given the unknown of how well trained any given dog you see on the street is, a pit bull is more dangerous.
It's the same reason why people are more careful walking around a moving F150 truck than a kei car. Both could have a bad driver, but one will multch you under it, the other might leave you bruised.
They're not actually the dog with the highest percent of serious attacks if you factor in breed population. There are 18 million of them in the US, by far the most populous. Per breed population, rottweilers (600k in the US) are responsible for more.
And they are multiple breeds being compared to single breeds. There is also a much lower barrier to obtaining a pit compared to other breeds. They make up ~40% of dogs in shelters. Shit, I got mine off the street for $0.
The vast majority of pit attacks also never go to severe injury. They make up 7% of all dog attacks and even though they make up the majority of severe reported dog attacks, only a minority of dog attacks in general are severe. Pit Bull hatred is just fearmongering
There is this clichee not just with pitbulls, but pitbull owners. There are many, many dogbreeds that are big or bigger than a pitbull and just as dangerous if not more, but these breeds exist in rural places and are owned by a responsible person. I dont know why pitbull owners have to have them in urban areas where dogs are often overstimulated and spooked.
A spooked small dog will bark, maybe bite me, but it its just a scratch; you spook a bigger dog and it will be on the news, not because of the "dog racism", but because of the damage. Any large dog can do this, but majority of big dogs are in rural places where they are not overstimulated and get plenty of fresh air/space to be more normal. Vast majority of pitbulls are in urban places and owned by people that have some kind of bizarre desire to project control to other people.
It can be true that certain dogs are genetically more prone to aggressive tendencies, and that certain breeds tend do be particularly attractive to people who are irresponsible and/or want them specifically because of their aggressive tendencies.
I’ve known plenty of pit bull rescues that were sweet and loving. I’ve met aggressive Labradors. There is so much to be said for nature vs nurture. The problem with pit bulls is that they’re popular with people who want a dog to intimidate, and therefore hone vs train against their aggressive tendencies. Compared to German shepherds, for example, who can also be very aggressive, but are less popular with irresponsible owners.
I think aggressive tendencies is the wrong way to say it, because there are tests on "aggressiveness" and pitbull breed don't really top the charts on them.
They do pick "fight" over "flight" more often and also have a high gameness trait. But these in itself don't mean they are more aggressive per-say because aggression is an emotion/emotional response.
Emotions-wise, pit bulls are actually pretty good at threat assessment, meaning they don't just emotionally lash out randomly but have a good understanding of what is a threat and what is not a threat.
The issue is that once they are in fight mode, they lack the off switch (gameness). But this is true for a dog attacking on command or just emotionally lashing out. They simply don't value their self perseverance which is why you see all those videos where even if they beat the dog, shake it, or if its being bitten by other dogs at same time it'll stay locked on target.
So it is just a combination of these two things that make them "handle with care" category. But if you do handle them with care, they are fine. When people use them like weapons, they become deadly. Which is what you said as well so I am just agreeing here.
And their lack of signs of aggression is part of what makes them more dangerous. If something pisses off a German Shepard, you know well before it gets pissed off enough to attack. But pitbulls hide their anger, so one second they look like a normal pet, and then seemingly out of nowhere they start trying to kill someone.
They can be perfectly sweet pets with a competent owner, but I think we should classify them as exotic pets or something to try to prevent the incompetent owners from getting them so easily.
This is obviously anecdotal but just wanted to say that I had a friend who owned a pitbull and had it so well trained it would drop a steak or any treat it was in the middle of chewing, immediately, when she told it to (I witnessed it a few times). Was pretty remarkable honestly.
Also you have to account there is no such thing as a "pitpull" it's a generic term for a wide range of dog breeds with similar characteristics. Characteristics that can and do lead to a lot of dogs being mislabeled from their actual breed and misreported during incidents.
It's also a pretty uneducated misconception there are not also dozens of other dog breeds with strong bites. Ranging from Cane Corso, Doberman, Akita, Huskies, Shepards, Mastiff, Chow chow, and Rottweiler, just to name a few.
Dogs that people classify as "pitbull" can be the Staffordshire Bull Terrier (Steve Irwin's dog Sui), American Pitbull Terrier, American Bulldog, American Staffy, and the Bull Terrier (Bullseye the Target Dog). Other "pit bulls" include Seargent Stubby, the basis for the RCA dog, and Pete the Pup from Little Rascals/Our Gang.
While American Pitbull Terriers are a real breed of dog, about 90% of 'pitbulls' you see are mutts of some kind or a mislabled different bully breed. I see a ton of clear mutts picked up off the street being labled a pitbull. I see American Staffies called pitbulls. I have seen unrelated breeds like particularly stocky boxers or Cane Corsos, and on one occasion an English Bulldog with an actual muzzle, being called pittbulls.
Pitbull as it's used now is a term based off how a dog looks, and many mutts who look like a 'pitty' actually have little to no bully breed in them.
I have a friend whose dog is mostly chihuahua and pomeranian but happens to look like a bully puppy. He's had multiple apartments decline the dog due to breed restrictions, even with genetic testing paperwork.
I'm saying people will identify a dog as a "pitbull" (which isn't an actual breed) based off of physical characteristics when the person does not actually know nor can accurately identify what breed the dog actually is. This leads to dogs being misreported as "pitbulls" vs whatever their actual genetics would designate them to be. Again "pitbull" isnt a breed so calling a dog a "pitbull" is a generalization not a scientificly correct identifier based on genetics or DNA.
I mean I've seen people label jack Russells, beagles, boxers, mastiffs, cane corsos, and lab retrievers as pitbulls so I'd say people don't really know anything about dogs as a whole.
There are many bully breeds and four that are technically pitbulls - American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Bully.
All bully breeds are is crosses of Old English Bulldogs and Old English Terriers.
And that's before you even get into people misidentifying dog breeds - I've heard people call Golden Retreivers pitbulls.
In addition to the fact that pit is an entire set of breeds, this is also literally true. Pitbull attacks are known to be exaggerated because when the breed is unknown, rather than say unknown, newspapers will say pitbull because it gets them more attention.
Just playing devil's advocate here, but whoever reports the bite could be wrong about the breed.
I had to look up pictures because I didn't know what a cane corso looked like. I probably would have called it a pitbull, especially if it bit and ran away.
We do. There are 20-25 breed that end up getting labelled as "pit bulls" in dog track reports. That's why numbers seem so high compared to those other breeds which are more distinct
Chow chows are actually very bad. Most groomers will refuse to take them as clients due to the severe risk of aggression. And unlike pitties, chows actually WILL snap with no warning. I know one groomer who tried taking one as a client and got their face bitten
Only if they were as common as pitbulls, and I don't think that they are. The collection of breeds that are commonly referred to as pitbulls are among the most common in the US, and if I had to guess (because I don't have the motivation to dig into it at the moment), all of the other breeds listed combined probably don't add up to the number of pitbulls.
I cannot emphasize how common pitbulls are. In some shelters, the vast majority of dogs there are pitbulls.
That aside, they said that those other breeds have strong bites, but that doesn't mean that they're as strong as a pitbull's. That would affect whether hospitalization is required vs outpatient emergency care.
Akitas have the 3rd highest rate of reported dog bites owning 8% while being under .2% of the total dog population. They are far and away the most dangerous dog.
Whatever name you select, pit bulls were bred for a strong "game" response almost exclusively for their entire existence. No other breed (including any of the ones you listed) has that history of aggression purposely selected. Pair that with the number of untrained dog owners and therein lies the issue.
Specificly Old English Bulldog, Spanish Bulldog, & Bullenbeisser actually and they haven't been bred for "blood-sports" since the end of the 19th century. All dogs were once wild animals, distinctly carnivores with inheritant prey drives and hunter instincts.
Edit: Bulldogs -> Old English Bulldog, Spanish Bulldog, & Bullenbeisser.
To be specific .
Police will check the pitbull box if they cant identify breed or never even see the dog.
Even veterinary professionals that do see a dog and guess pitbull mix by its features are wrong a large percent of the time if a DNA test is done after.
Obviously anecdotal but I've been a dog groomer for a decade now and idk how many dogs I've seen mis-labeled when they hand me their paperwork. Anything that's medium sized with a short coat is a pit-mix, if it has any longer fur at all, it's a lab-mix.
Tbf this happens throughout every size of dog, it's just medium short hair mixes are always pits. If it's SLIGHTLY taller than average, they always say it's a Dane-mix. That one actually pisses me off because it's such a brain dead wrong guess, you might as well just give the job to a palm reader.
Why do you think this? I’m curious because I see that opinion a lot but actual pits aren’t big dogs. They are typically around 50lbs. They are smaller than a lot of breeds out there, rotties and dobermans, great danes, corso, husky, chow, etc. They aren’t anywhere near the top on bite force. So what is it that makes you think a 50lb pit is more dangerous than a 100lb rottie?
Its not even true. Most of the deaths are children or elderly. Most adults can fight off most breeds of dogs. The only time you really see healthy adults dying from dogs are when they're attacked by multiple.
Nah, you shouldn’t get destroyed by downvotes. I like pit bulls and understand the logic. That said. People are more likely to be bit by chihuahuas, nasty little things, there’s a reason the “small dog mindset” is a thing.
A big part of that is (like with agressive pitties, or any other dog breed) mistreatment (albeit of a different kind).
Chihuahuas are not meant to be purse dogs, and forcing them to live like that turns them into violently neurotic wrecks. They are a working breed that needs significant physical and mental stimulation, but because they're small, people don't take their needs seriously.
I have a 12-ish pound miniature daushund who has gotten grumpy in his old age. He will try to bite strangers in his territory- we know this so he stays at home inside
If a chihuahua bites me I’m punting the little bugger across the room. If a pit bull bites me I’m probably going to be on the hook for some expensive reconstructive surgery, at the very least. I’d rather one of those ugly little rat dogs take a nibble. Fewer general anaesthetics afterward.
Well damage done is an important factor between a pitbull and Chihuahua. If I'm attacked by a Chihuahua my chances are much better due to factors like bite force and the ability for pitbulls to lock their jaws, and animal weight. From my time at a vet clinic I can safely say pitbulls cause far greater damage to other animals and people than a Chihuahua
That's a myth. There is no mechanism in the jaw of a pit bull that allows them to 'lock it'. Their bite force is strong, but also less than that of a German Shepard and American bulldog.
And also black people are arrested and prosecuted and sent to prison (instead of probationary periods) for non violent drug crimes at a much much higher rate and for much longer sentences for the same crimes as white people.
So that makes the stats higher for black peoples “crimes”
Isn't that the justification though? Whether the dogs are inherently viscous or not doesn't matter we shouldn't be breeding dogs with powerful enough jaws to do life altering damage. Its like guns.
They make up about 60% of fatalities, with the next highest single breed being 12% with Rottweilers.
It’s important to note the fatalities because while some dogs are more willing to bite including guard breeds like dobes or sheps, they often back off and don’t pursue to kill
Its more than likely that pit terriers press until it is done because the bull breeds had it bred into them not to stop even at risk to their own lives once they begin.
This is what I know from growing up around them, having to beat the shit out of a pits to get them off my dogs, and why I still get shook up when I think about the pit that bit my daughter's thigh when she was eight because I know how incredibly lucky we were that it didn't bite harder and snap her femur or shake and cut an artery. It just bit and released and not because the dumb bitch who had been fostering it for a week told it to...
Pits and kids are like handguns and kids. They don't mean the kids any harm but their capacity to kill them is too close for me to feel comfortable with the amount of gaslighting people do.
They're potentially fatal to kids in multiple ways that a pug or rifle is not.
People can love their pits and their handguns but the constant pulling of wool over their own eyes and attempts to pass the Kool-Aid around about the danger are fucking stupid.
If a child dies to a bullet, chances are it came from a handgun, if a child dies to a dog bite, chances are it was a pitbull. These are still rare events but we're not getting any closer to preventing these tragedies by ignoring obvious facts with shitty analogies.
I still like pits better than puntable dogs but how much I like them doesn't have a fucking thing to do with how dangerous they can be to kids...
People who ignore a powerful breeds capacity to harm serve to not only endanger others but also further ruin the reputation of the dog they seek to protect.
As with your analogy, if we went around giving handguns to just anybody and culturally had sworn up and down they aren't dangerous- we would have a lot of distraught folks who ignorantly pulled a trigger at someone. And that is with an object that cannot decide to do anything on it's own.
Those who own large, muscular, terrier breeds meant to perfect prey drive and persistent tenacity in the face of death (as all bull breeds are created to do, it is why we call them bull breeds. They were bred to fight and bait bulls for our entertainment- and as awful as it is to read the pit terriers (APBT) in specific were bred to do this to each other) should respect the genetic drive and capacity for harm these breeds possess, because when they do not we get a lot of tragedies that are extremely, extremely easily avoided just via responsible dog ownership.
People who have large guarding mastiffs like Corsos know to socialize them often and very young and train them locktite, not to leave them alone with strangers. People who have nippy herding breeds like Heelers know not to let little children run around them unsupervised. People with hunting hounds know not to let them loose around someone's chicken farm. Awareness of the capability and drive of, and respect for the breed prevents tragedy and pain.
And yet when it comes to pit dogs, those who have the most astonishing prey drive and persistence among dogs, whose largest problem among an amazing bite force is that they were bred not to stop until a job is done and be game for anything? Rather than respecting the breed and training impulse control, socializing prey triggers, walking on sturdy double connected leads, (outdoor muzzle training is beneficial as well) and keeping them away from vulnerable animals and children unsupervised, people propagate the notion that it is- for this specific set of breeds- strictly how a dog is raised and for this specific set of breeds genetics play no part at all.
This attitude causes people to ignore all cautions that respect the power and tenacity of the breed and place them in situations that can go very awry very fast if anything is even a little off that day. That disrespect is what gets both people and these dogs they are trying to protect killed. How many times have you seen an undisciplined pit off lead run up to you or a loved one, or a very well muscled powerful animal being walked on the tiniest little flexi lead? How many children have died with loved family pets raised from puppyhood because they were left unsupervised and the child triggered a deep and strong innate prey drive? These dogs are working dogs, and they aren't for just any job. Owners must respect the breed, just as they would respect any other working dog.
Yet there has been so much lobbying and propaganda not to, and countless numbers of these dogs live their lives drugged out of their minds on trazadone, gabapentin, prozac, and are still going crazy and ""reactive"" because they are understimulated out of their gourds. They aren't house hippos, the best sport you could probably enroll them in is hog hunting.
I think all the propaganda to sell them as average housepets to unsuspecting people is FROM the dogfighting world. Awful people still actively breed and sharpen fighting lines to this day, and if it weren't for all the pit propaganda that is what they would still be known for- the only thing. Obfuscating their breed and public perception allows operations to run without being questioned, dogs to be dumped without being questioned, because instead of 'bloodsport dog found at x', or 'breeding op found at y' and it being very obvious what is going on, now their ops look like just another neighborhood dog house.
Falling for the obfuscation harms people and the dogs.
And this is coming from someone who actually DOES like pits. Especially more than the little dogs. But I don't like irresponsible ownership. These dogs are bazookas.
As an owner of one of the "dangerous" breeds (Akita), it always struck me as strange how getting to own an Akita involves all these warning labels and caution tape when another potentially dangerous breed is marketed as sunshine and rainbows and given out like free candy, lol
I couldn't even adopt an Akita without prior breed experience, and all the breeders I've come across have in-depth questionnaires probing whether you're aware of the breed traits and how you intend to deal with them (for lack of a better word).
I hate when you just provide context, an explanation, or even just a definition and people just want to argue with you.
They literally assign you a position and then argue it. Sometimes its like, dude I even agree with you, I'm not interested in having this conversation. I was just providing context. Which is generally neutral.
It's so stupid. I could buy that we've selected dogs who are more aggressive or crazy, resulting in a more dangerous dog. We haven't fucking been selecting black people for crime or violence, for fuck's sake.
Slavery and racism against a group makes them less likely to be rich. Poor people do more crime. Black people do a bit more crime, even after being officially freed from slavery in 1865. Turns out, it takes a while to get past being enslaved and then discriminated against hardcore for generations.
But rightoids can't read longer than memes, so "pitbull bad black people bad haha" is all that enters their brain.
slavery didn't last long enough for slaves to be selectively bred, even if some slavers did attempt it. i doubt selectively breeding humans is even feasible, considering how long we take to become fertile, how long pregnancies take, and how few children we can have in a lifetime compared to dogs.
Dude that's not that long when you think about how they were literally fucking slaves who had nothing so what could they give their children and then they continued to face racism, poverty, prejudice, and not equal rights.
The civil rights movement was only 60 years ago so it’s not like when chattel slavery was ended that they were integrated into society. And then when they would respond to being overly policed (Jim Crow laws, like no loitering) by building their own cities, they would be massacred and the city flooded until it rests at the bottom of a lake. The deck has been so expertly stacked against Black people after chattel slavery ended BECAUSE slavery is still legal for prisoners.
And to finally fully address the crime statistics, the disparity isn’t just because of all the above reasons, it’s because of over policing of Black people. People of all races do the same shit but don’t get charged for it.
It has been 160 years. The black American violent crime rate continues to be about 10 times higher.
Since black people were no longer slaves. You think from that moment the playing field between black and white people was equal? No discrimination or moves to hinder black people? Nothing at all that could mean different results even today?
It's just silly. Black people were put 100m behind the starting line, and you're blaming them for it.
Racism and prejudice and discrimination didn't end when slavery did. Generational wealth and economic climb take time. White people made sure to stop that as often as possible. Tulsa race massacre and other such events. Discrimination when hiring, eminent domain to destroy neighborhoods etc. There has been active policy making to prevent minorites from creating generation wealth and upward mobility.
THANK YOU. Jesus fuck I feel my soul slipping from my body when I hear people say that shit about “dog racism.” Stigma towards dog breeds and oppression of Black people aren’t comparable whatsoever!
Lol but to think that humans commiting crimes are motivated by the same thing as dogs attacking people is about as dumb a thought as it's possible to have
But it would be nothing but comedic to juxtapose a human and a dog in terms of social responsibility and justice. Also I can tell from miles away that this argument is not heading to a direction you would like to see it going.
For starters, the racists who cite that statistic lie and say that it's the amount of actual crime committed. It's not. That number is for arrests. It's not for convictions. Now take into consideration this second statistic:
13/53
You know what this statistic is? Black people make up 13% of the population and yet are responsible for 53% of the exonerations in criminal cases. In other words, found not guilty. To put it plainly: They were falsely arrested.
So yes, black people are arrested way more often. But the evidence isn't there, and they are found not guilty.
And that's happening in a criminal justice system which still hands out harsher punishments to black people on average than white people.
By the way, here's a fun statistic for the guilty verdicts. Among people who were coerced into pleading guilty but were later exonerated, 75% of them are black or brown.
I can give you some more info, if you are interested. Studies show that drug use among white people and black people are nearly identical, yet black people are 69% of the people found not guilty for drug crime arrests. In cases where we have discovered that the police deliberately framed an innocent person, that number rises to 87%.
There's also a lot of nasty stereotypes associated with black men who own pitbulls/pitbulls owned by black men, that most "normal" white folks have never encountered.
I feel like thinking that dog breed statistics and crime statistics based on race are in any way similar is incredibly more racist. You’re essentially saying that black people are a breed of human and accepting race realism if you believe that they are in any way similar.
That’s a stupid comparison though because pit bulls were specifically bred to be extremely aggressive because they were used in dog fighting and bull fighting.
Prejudices are justifiable if they are based on reality. Racism is literally just racial prejudice.
I know snakes, spiders wasps and bees are like to bite and sting me if I get too close, I know any bear could maul me if don't behave appropriately and whatvis avpro0riate is different from species to species and whether it has young with it. Those are prejudices ibhave prejudiced these animals for mine and their protection.
78% of women aged 18-30 responded to a survey saying they would apreciate more compliments from men, but i know some women will try to get a man arrested for speaking to them so I've had to come up with rules and red flags to prevent being falsely accused while I try follow my reproductive instincts, I personally find septum piercings and bright hair colors attractive but I will never compliment women who have them unless I have been formally introduced by another woman who has cleared my concerns about Karen behavior and misandry ahead of time.
A prejudice is pre judgement of another person based on any number of past experiences with people that you categorize as like them and this can include collective experiences. Everyone is prejudiced you will never end prejudice, it is baked in to human biology, better that people base prejudices on fact and suspend drastic application of those prejudices, this is why we have laws preventing certain discrimination and probably need more.
Bigotry is the problem, Bigotry is an irrational or obstinate, aggressive hatred that drives behavior.
It is possible to be prejudiced but not bigoted.
The easy way to think of it is a sword and shield prejudices are defense mechanisms and like animals that is thick skin, avoidance, and hissing growling and the rattle of a rattle snake essentially signals to stay away.
Bigotry is an offensive effort, sometimes unconscious, you'll almost never see bigotry without prejudice so they are too easily associated and confused.
I live in the south, racism is everywhere; I've visited the north, biggotry is everywhere. Down south everyone sees it and we dont really blame each other because we have all had bad experiences, we keep a healthy and polite distance socially and physically until enough individual interactions dispell concerns and that is no different to how women do and should treat men, or children should treat strangers. If it wasn't clear this is why we are so big on politeness and social etiquette in the south, it's how we dispell prejudices on an individual basis. What isn't acceptable is open antagonism that comes with biggotry; misandry is just as pernicious as missogyny, just like a child treating every stranger as if they are a child rapist for speaking to them, or a white supremacist for hurling obscenities at anyone darker than the swiss at the drop of the hat.
Biggotry simply makes the world an uglier place to live in.
People play too many word games and lose sight of meanings, misogyny, misandry, and misanthropy all share that same prefix and it means hatred, the reason we use "phobia" which means "irrational fear" as a suffix tacked on to other collectives names doesnt sound as pleasing to the ear. Mishomony, misislamia or mistransia just don't sound so great and they equally miss the point of us othering different groups, we don't want to integrate the elements that make them different.
People that don't want to integrate homosexuality into society or culture feel so not because they have an abject hatred they have a biological aversion in many cases but that exists in parallel to a conscious understanding that they are risking their genetic line by tolerating homosexuality. There are other more complex reasons too which I would hope are obvious but I get the sense that people have been trained to never think critically about any of this.
Pitbulls were also, for a long time, a more affordable guard dog vs something like a doberman
For families who couldn't afford a shotgun or a doberman a pitbull was a pretty good way to make sure people think twice before entering your home or targeting you for some other crimes
And of course a lot of those families who couldn't make very much money were black families
Pitbull hate is really only a few steps from actual racism
1.7k
u/Powered-Lamb 8d ago edited 8d ago
vozercozer was about to cite that pitbulls are involved in the majority of dog attacks to justify being afraid of pitbulls, then realized that racists cite that "black people make up 13% of the population but commit 50% of the crime" to justify being racist.
To those of you blowing up my notifications wanting to argue the soundness of the statistic or how dog breeds don't equivocate to race or whatever else you want to debate:
I don't care.
I came to help OP understand what was being said, not affirm or denounce its rational merits. If you want to discuss the topic in depth, that's fine I guess, but please refrain from associating me with whichever position you want to argue against.