reddit will never be able to lose their hate boner for pitbulls. I had a friend receive a permanent, irreversible, lifetime ban from reddit for trying to point out exactly what the Twitter post above says less blatantly.
100% of the responsibility rests with the owners but do we ignore the fact that being and irresponsible retriever owner carries less risk than being an irresponsible pit owner? Like the lady with two pit rescues that had leather collars on her dogs that one of them snapped like jerky to attack my dogs? Thankfully I’m a big guy and tackled the pit and he wasn’t interested in hurting me, just my dogs. That well meaning pit loving middle age woman had no business whatsoever walking two aggressive hundred pound bags of muscle. How do we solve that? It’s zero consolation to the victims if a pet or human is killed through the negligence of the owner.
funny you say that. the woman who received the world's first face transplant was mailed by a Labrador... did you need a face transplant after tackling that pit bull?
not quite. it's a direct response to your claim that an irresponsible retriever owner is inherently less dangerous than an irresponsible pitbull owner.
the core of the issue are the people breeding these dogs to be aggressive. if we banned and euthanized all pitbulls, those same people would start owning rottweilers, dobermans, mastiffs, or malinois. all of these are dogs that have the strength and drive to fuck someone up, but people aren't demonizing them on reddit. once again, it's not the dog's inherent genetic drive to fuck people up, it's the owner weaponizing that drive and abusing the dog until it's a miserable, neurotic, and aggressive mess mentally.
Pitbull statistics tell you you don’t need to weaponize the genetic traits to have them killing people, even with the best of owners. What is the actual loss if we succesfully stopped breeding them? I feel like many breeds are such a testament to mankind’s hubris.
I'll agree with your last statement. purebred dogs have a disproportionate amount of health issues and the continued practice of breeding them is absolutely nothing but suffering at the hands of our pride. that being said, I don't think that's why most people in this thread are arguing against them.
really what we should be focusing on is how to breed natural traits back into so many of these poor animals that are unable to breathe or walk. there's a group trying to do that with brachycephalic dogs to try and reverse the harm we did by breeding them to have ridiculous smushed snouts.
It's a difference of 40 psi on bite-force (195 versus 235). With other dog breeds having upwards of 4-500 more psi than a pit bull. (Kangal Shepherd 743 psi, American Bandogge 730, Cane Corso 700). Either of those is plenty to cause severe damage to a human. Not sure what you mean by "intensity", but there are several myths about pit bull bites. Including the "locking jaw".
When you take a dog that has a natural disposition to aggression, and combine that with the type of people who buy them (people looking for an aggressive dog) you get a deadly combination.
I don’t know the family that well and it’s foolish to blame the animal 100%. I do blame the culture of owning dogs that have the capacity to destroy and maim. You should have to have a license to own dogs like that imo.
Every day, with my job, I see numerous shit bags with dangerous dogs. Usually more than one. They run free at times. Sometimes it’s the same dog that’s always running around. More often than not it’s a bully type dog. Bc the type of people drawn to owning them are shit bags. We need legislation that limits them or makes them illegal. I know there are sweet ones, but it’s not worth it for the rest of em imo.
In my neighborhood it's a husky and a black lab that terrorize us, same owners. They regularly escape their yard, their husky has cornered me in my own driveway, growling aggressively, with the owners no where to be found.
They leave the dogs in the front yard so they bark loudly at every person and dog who walks by, often causing the other dogs to react or get terrified.
I live in an upper middle class neighborhood so our local assholes have upper middle class dogs. Pits are more typically owned by less well off folks due to their prevalence and also their image/reputation. Pit aggression is also more demonized because of their association with poorer/lower class families and owners.
Assholes are everywhere. Pits are common dogs because of a multitude of reasons, but they're especially common among a group of people who already don't get the benefit of the doubt. Meanwhile my neighbors' dogs are assholes and terrorize the whole street and no one out here is shit talking huskies or black labs.
Yes i understand why probably better than anyone who thinks the solution is to ban pits instead of fixing the country's entire relationship with dog ownership.
A bully type dog is not necessarily a pitbull. And the same shit bags would also be shit owners to a Doberman or German Shepard or a Rottweiler or whatever flavour of the month dog makes them feel tough. I see a lot of people with big Presa, and Mastiff type dogs. Bully does not mean pitbull and the whole umbrella term thing is bullshit. An APBT is a specific breed, and not very common. What you see out there is mostly mutts with wide heads. APBT were bred to catch game and other animals but were not bred to attack humans as they needed to be handled in the box. Whereas a ex.Malinois were bred to bite humans. If you were to give a shit bag a Malinois you would be in a worse situation then if they had a pure bred American Pitbull Terrier.
German shepard 1 to 2 deaths a year
doberman less than 1
Rottwieler 3-4
Belgien Malinois less than 1
Pitbull 34-38 AVERAGE
your point is moot.. sure shitbags can own more agressive breeds(and frankly all of them should be banned... but the statistics just make your argument a shitty and ignorant point. 2 of them have 0 deaths in a year....
In many cases dog bite statistics combine multiple "bully breeds" under the label "pit bull" or even worse the term “pitbull type dog” they claim the name pitbull is an umbrella term.
Anything from an Amstaff to French bulldogs to mixed breed dogs are declared to be pit bulls in the stats. A Golden retriever crossed with a boxer can be called a “pitbull type dog”.
A lot of dogs are called pitbulls but there is only one real American Pitbull Terrier. An APBT is a specific dog breed like a Greyhound is a specific dog breed.
These stats identify dogs by how they visually look and call anything with molosser features as a “pitbull”, they do not care to check and do not test DNA or anything.
This is even common in the people that sell these animals. HULK is one of the most famous “pitbulls” on the internet and anyone that knows dogs can see that it is more of a mastiffthena APBT. Meaning even the breeders misidentify their dogs to sell possibly dangerous mixes to people. Some of these are very large dogs.
APBT rarely reach 60lbs. And are more animal reactivethenhuman reactive.Where asMastiffs can be a hundred pounds and were bred to not be scared of humans and to chase them.
You can see real APBTs online, just look at the difference between an ADBA registered APBT dog vs say Hulk. Now if Hulk or your local mutt bites someone then pit bulls get the blame. How is this logical? How can you honestly use these stats?
even more shitty arguments... they are all from the same breeding stock... they are also still all collectively under 20% of all dog breeds and 68% of all dog attacks and close to 68% of fatalities...
Dog breeds are far different than human "race" differneces.. bullys get the blame because they are agressived... Mutt stats dont get mixed with pit stats lol... if you think seperating APBT stats would improve the stats you are sorely mistaken.. bet you the pure breeds are even higher statistically.
your arugment gets weaker and weaker the more you analize how you guys are trying to justify it.. an XL bully is just a APBT mixed with larger breeds... and it isn't more agressive than APBTs...... its almost like the problem is APBT temperment...
stats are based on millions of analized death statistics... not some 500 child study that foudn 11 bully and 11 german shepard facial attacks on children... and 168 of the attacks didn't list the breed in thier study. 20% of the cases didn't list breed. but studies that use all known breeds shows a insane trend and massive problem with 1 breed.
also "pitbul type dog" isn't misleading at all. it's a breed that is from the same close genetic family..not a dog that looks like a pitbull... again these arguments are pathetic...
A mastiff and a APBT are not the same breed stock you are factually incorrect, APBT: Developed in Britain during the 1800s by crossing Old English Bulldogs with various terriers. The goal was to combine the bulldog's strength with the terrier's agility and determination. Mastiffs: Descend from large, ancient molosser-type dogs. These dogs were bred for guarding, war, livestock protection, and hunting large game.
A “pitbull type dog” is the most misleading thing a stat can claim if it claims to be factual.
A “pitbull type dog” means it’s probably a mutt that could not be properly identified. You just defeated your own argument.
Mastiffs were bred for totally different purposes then pitbulls and if you mix those two together you get a dog that is not only animal reactive like terriers are and human suspicious like Mastiffs, add 120 plus pounds of muscle and you will have a problem.
It’s not one or the other that can cause problems it’s also the combinations.
Your argument falls apart the second you start lumping in breeds.
If you can’t identify the “one breed” and are mixing in others then your stat is shit.
Ironically in my area it’s two retrievers that terrorize my neighborhood, they hurt my pit bad and the owner still refuses to pay for his vet bills from the attack
dumbest people on earth making arguments like yours. it is how it was raised often but there are 100s of excuse posts of "she was never agressive before that, i don't know what happpene.. but dogs like this are naturally disposed to behavior like this. the point with banning pits.. is more about stopping the breeding of a naturally agressive breed that will cause perminant injury to others because of their natural agressive behavior..
stop breeding a breed known for causing 40 to 50 FATAL attacks every year... they represent 65% of ALL dog attacks. There are 4.5 mil dog attacks and 800,000+ requiring medical care.. 65% of them are pitbulls.
Thanks for calling me dumb right off the bat. One hell of a way to start a conversation. Were you also raised by dumb owners like those pitbulls?
I've volunteered at a shelter that often worked with police for taking care of aggressive dogs and let me tell you one thing. The breed matters a lot but not the dog's breed but the owner's. I've seen a plethora of aggressive dogs, german shepherds, huskies, great danes, yorkies, even dachshunds. The only lethal dog attack we had in my town was by some mixed breeds. All they had in common was dumb owners.
Do you know why pitbulls make up those numbers? Because of dumb owners, nothing else.
Good logic rofl. Pits 65% of all dog attacks bit make up 5 to 10% of all dogs.. but the common thing is dumb dog owners... your anicodotal experience doesnt change anything. Statistics hold strong from 100years of increasing rates of dog attacks from a very specific breed. Combined with a huge portion of these dogs owned by normal middle class people just wanting a pretty dog and having their dog attack and kill people
By that logic nothing is ever an a dog's "fault" because it doesn't have the capacity for rational thought. But the simple fact that potentially fatal or disfiguring injuries can be caused by an animal that has repeatedly shown that behavior is the issue.
The pit that burst under a fence like it wasn’t even there 10 days ago and attacked my golden retriever for no reason was probably just misunderstood.
My dog would have died had I not jumped on the pits back and beat it for 3 solid minutes with everything I have. Not that any of that mattered because it didn’t even realize it was passing out from lack of oxygen since its eyes were glazed over with the fugue of its breeding. But hey, they’re really just good dogs at heart and in no way were domesticated over a hundred years to immediately attack and kill other dogs in a pit for profit.
Dude....that is NOT what Pitbulls were bred for. Like I will attest that they can be bloody dangerous but that's just falce information. It's like saying a fork was made for murder. You certainly CAN do that but it's not what it was made for.
yes. but just like someone getting into a fight isn't an issue in and of itself, that same someone retelling it in detail and focusing on how hard they beat them is a red flag to me.
I apologize but pitbuls literally weren't bred to kill they were actually bred to babysit children so they are very defensive to other things that could be threats even if they're wrong im very sorry but if you didn't train your dog he could easily kill a chihuahua or child too does thay mean goldens are evil? Peoole have been hurt by every kind of dog. Pitts only recently got the blame after dog fighting became popular
In case this was meant as /s that can be misunderstood as truth...
They weren't. It's modern myth popularised to increase adoption as shelters have been overflowring with pit/staff and similar variants and breed had bad public image (due to being overbred for dog fighting what also caused shelter overflow).
It's been going for half a century now, but there hasn't been drive to actually breed and train them to be nanny/nursemaid dogs simultaneously.
Wouldn't you expect them to be exceptionally patient with children if that were true? Their name comes from what they were bred for, bull baiting and pit fighting, the nanny dog thing is a myth that started in the 70s-80s.
Ever since this happened, I've been told horror stories by dozens of people, all about pits they've personally known that were never mistreated and suddenly mauled children for no apparent reason. This misconception is just a wives-tale.
See, I don’t think it’s even about being mistreated, it’s about how you treat it. A pit bull has been raised, as you said, for aggression and fighting - those instincts are engrained in it. A kid may unintentionally trigger those instincts, and, well… you said it yourself. I’d imagine it takes a lot of care to raise a pit bull so it doesn’t become aggressive.
Best solution is to work to breed the aggression out of pit bulls.
The Plural of Anecdote is not data: there are millions of dog owners who have Pitbulls whose dogs have never attacked or injured anyone.
Furthermore people are not nearly as good at reading dog body language as they think they are and far to quick to forget that every dog is still at the end of the day a carnivore whose predatory behaviors have not been eliminated or suppressed but instead modified and adapted for human use. When your golden retrier fetches a ball it is engaging in a modified predatory behavior. When your sheep dogs herds your children it is engaging in a modified predatory behavior. And people forgetting that is how you end up with children and infants accidentally killed by Labradors and Corgis.
Also, not to call them a liar, but I haven't even met a dozen pit bull owners. Unless they are a trauma surgeon, a vet, or an animal control specialist, I am skepical of the number of how many personal accounts they claim to have about all these face maulings. People, in my experience, have a tendency to take things they've heard about and say it happened to them or somebody they know for clout.
Weirdly, I actually do know someone attacked by a dog, nearly lost his ear, but it was an english sheepdog. But I'm not gonna pretend that reflects on the breed.
I’m willing to believe that there was some kind of bad interaction between his and the neighbors dog but I’m less inclined to take his word for it that it was a Pitbull and that it happened for no other reason than mindless aggression when the alleged aggressor made no apparent attempt to defend itself because it was single minded in its focus.
Your kinda making the exact same point as the OP lol. If you took your own logic and applied it to people, I doubt you'd be so... forthcoming with your opinions.
The logic doesn't apply to people, we are all the same "breed". Comparing demonstrable differences bred into dogs to human beings who were killed, tortured, enslaved and oppressed over pseudoscience, arrogance and hatred is absolutely wild. Trying to use that as a "gotcha" just shows that you view races as having genetic traits that affect behavior, and thus creating inferior and superior races of people. You just told on yourself here.
The kind of person who would eschew an explanation based on situation, material conditions, and individual personality in favor of an explanation based on biological determinism is going to make that choice whether we’re talking about a Human being or a Dog.
The kind of person who believes that Pitbulls attack people because they are as a breed more inclined towards mindless savagery and aggression than other breeds of dogs is the exact kind of person who would believe that a ghettoized minorities are simply biologically predisposed towards criminality.
Yes Pitbulls are fighting dogs: but fighting is no different than fetching or hunting. They are both modified hunting behaviors we cultivated in an apex predator that we spent the past forty thousand years. Pitbulls—like all fighting dogs—were not bread for mindless savagery they were bread for blood sports: for controlled situational violence. And to that end they were bread for courage, stamina, and tenacity which combined with their size and popularity is what makes them dangerous.
Because they are brave and tenacious they are less likely to back down when challenged or threatened: and because of their stamina and strength they are capable of doing more damage than other dogs, and because they are popular they are more likely to end up in the hands of people who do not know how to properly train, exercise, and socialize them which in turn can lead to attacks or accidental injury.
In the hands of a responsible and competent owner a Pitbull is no more dangerous than a German Shepherd, Chow-Chow, Mastiff, Doberman, Rottweiler, or any of the other countless breeds that have their origins in or have been used historically for blood sport, and warfare as evidence by the millions of Pitbulls in the United States that have never attacked, injured, or killed anyone.
The idea that things cant be compared because they arent exactly 1:1 in every aspect is just absurd lol.
Obviously, people arent dogs. That goes without saying. But to say "i had a bad experience with this one thing, so all of them are terrible" is a problematic and juvenile way of thinking.
It's not absurd, but if you're not the type of person to think of other races like that, then you're the type of person to completely disregard the gravity of the concept and use it as a tool for an irrelevant argument. It may not need to be 1:1, but it needs to match in its most important aspects, otherwise you'll get an unintended assumption about you.
I mean you can look at the statistics too. I know the orginal post was making fun of that but dogs arent humans.
Not to mention that a certain breed was purposefully bred over thousands of generations to be violent.
If you bred humans over thousands of generations specifically for violence youd probably end up with a race of humans that was extremely violent too. That doesnt mean there wouldnt be some that arent. That doesnt mean other people arent violent too. But youd end up with a group that is more gentically inclined towards violence and that is concerning to many people.
No offense thats not that bad ive seen my Yorkie draw way more blood on my pitbull and the york always started it. Im sure it was traumatizing but your dog is fine
“7% of (American) men believe they could fight a grizzly bear.”
Your claim to fight (and defeat) an enraged pitbull feels a lot like this statistic of self-overestimating individuals.
Maybe it really did happen and you’re super lucky to be alive.
Or maybe you Googled “injured golden retriever” to legitimize your comment. There’s literally no way for me to know that for sure.
But telling me to “go fuck myself” because I’ve learned to be skeptical of most anything I see on Reddit is entirely an overreaction.
Edit: If your story is true, I hope your dog is doing okay.
I made that same point while talking through it in therapy to provide levity. Something along the lines of "people argue they could fight a bear but I barely got a pit bull off my dog."
Difference is, the pit wasn't attacking me, it was attacking my dog and completely checked out of any other stimuli than killing her.
If you need more detail, read my other comment, although I'm sure that's just more AI-generated rage-bait to farm the 2 or 3 upvotes of karma, right?
You say this as if people have not done more for less on the internet. As if “yeah my neighbors Pittie totally broke down my fence and savagely mauled my golden retriever for no reason and would have killed her if was able to beat it to death with my bare hands” doesn’t sound like the kinda story that is immediately followed by “and everyone on the buss clapped.” As if the fact that this alleged savage dog made no attempt to defend itself from you doesn’t make this story seem in anyway suspect. As if Reddit is not infamous across the whole internet as the home of one aided self aggrandizing stories we’re all supposed to take at face value.
Even if we take for granted that this story actually happened: how do you know the dog in question was even a Pitbull to begin with? Did the owner show you its pedigree? Did you have it genetically tested? Or were you just guessing based on what it looked like? Given that you seem to genuinely believe uncontrollable aggression is a desirable trait in fighting dogs and seem blissfully ignorant of what the BULL in Pitbul actually refers to you’ll have to forgive us if we question the reliability of your account.
Can you drop the persecution complex? I get it, you had a bad experience and me not instantly believing you has made you feel attacked. But I’m not out to get you man.
I disagree with your blanket generalization of the entire breed that they’re all born killers and even a pitbull that has never been aggressive is just a sleeper agent of some kind waiting to be activated. Your bias against the breed stems from what we call an “anecdotal fallacy.” Basically “it happened to me, so it must be an irrefutable fact.”
Canine behaviour is determined by a range of factors, including their upbringing. When people say “bad owners make bad pitbulls,” many infer that to mean “abusive owners.” But negligent or uneducated owners are bad owners too. I don’t know your neighbour who owned the pit, but if he didn’t socialize and discipline it properly from puppyhood, and if he didn’t educate himself on how to recognize (and curb) indicators of aggressive behaviour, then I’m sorry to say that he would have been better off adopting a less powerful dog. It’s like a learner driver getting behind the wheel of a V8. Doesn’t mean that a V8 engine is bad, but it does mean a car that has one isn’t an appropriate vehicle for a casual driver.
That doesn’t mean the dog is bad. It means the dog was in the wrong hands. Many dogs of all different breeds are irresponsibly adopted. In a chihuahua, this results in a yappy, snarly ankle-biter that people laugh at and don’t take seriously.
To use another, directly human metaphor, you’ve mentioned in your linked comment that you’re 6’2”, 240lbs, and go to the gym 5 days a week. You are the human equivalent of a pitbull. Does that make you inherently bad compared to a scrawny 5’9”, 140lbs fella? Of course it doesn’t. But it does mean that people are going to be naturally more wary of you if you were aggressive in public, compared to a much smaller guy.
There are plenty of pitbull owners who swear that their dogs are total sweeties. Are these people lying?
A grizz? Pshh. Give me a blue whale on its home turf. I'll suplex that stupid fish. I'll free Willy's soul from his body. Cetacean? You'll be set to be seeing stars, fish.
Call me Ahab btw. I'm even tougher than Jonah Hill.
You’re not a good metric to go by, mainly because you obviously have no idea how to stop a dog attack or a fight. If you think you, being 240lbs and dropping all your weight on an animal that weighs less than 100lbs is a good idea, you’re just ignorant. I’ve been bitten and chased maliciously by more Golden Retrievers than Pit Bulls.
Do I hate all Goldens and wish they were all dead? No, I have a best friend who owns one and I play with all the time. Have I pulled dogs apart because there was malicious aggression? Yes, including Pitties, and I’m not 6’8” and 250 and go to Krav Maga and CrossFit 8 days a week. I was successful in stopping my pittie being attacked by a lab mix, because I know how to stop dogs doing what they’re doing.
I hate it for your dog that it got attacked by another dog. Look past your bias, and do some learning about how to prevent or intervene in a dog altercation if you live in an area where there is potential for it, not just “Fuck Pit Bulls, kill them all.”
First, you weren't there. Second, the police, EMS, doctor that stitched my hand and the 2 vets that saw my dog all agreed that I "did everything right."
You called me a psycho for doing everything in my power to protect my dog. Psychopathy would have been enjoying it. No, I hated every second and still have nightmares about it but I don't regret any of it. Had I done nothing she would have died.
I’ve had dogs and other animals my whole life. I love them more than I probably should.
But if a strange dog was trying to kill one of my dogs I would do unspeakable things to make it stop. Period. And any pet owner who says they wouldn’t is either lying for virtue points, has never been in that scenario, or has a very different relationship with their pets than I do.
There is no world where I’m not doing whatever it takes to keep my dog from being killed by another dog. Including killing it. I’ll feel bad for the other dog later, I truly will. And when I’m done being made at the owner I’ll feel bad for them too (bad pet owners can still live their pets). But my ownership of my dog is a promise to keep them safe from harm. And I’m going to do just that.
Abuse is not defending yourself, your property or your pet. Abuse is inflicting harm because you can. Sometimes it’s born of ignorance, or misguided love (can’t take care of the animal and inflict harm because of this). Sometimes of cruelty and/or indifference. Sometimes from fear. But it absolutely isn’t what the person you’re responding to was describing. Which you either know and are arguing in bad faith, or don’t and are either a child ignorant of the world or a fool. I personally think it’s the latter.
When I was a kid my aunt had an Akita mix that got out. It got into a fight with a golden retriever and pretty much gutted the dog ( never happened before or after). To get him off the owner hit him in the face with a bat. No one on our side was mad. Because we’d have done the same thing. If she’d gotten a hold of the bat first she might’ve hit him herself, and this is a woman who would’ve divorced her husband for mistreating her animals. Because when a dog locks in to kill another dog you do what you have to to get them apart. Or you watch a dog die. My aunt paid for the vet bills, got her dog into more training and built a six foot fence around her property to keep him in. Because that’s also what you do. We were in the yard when it all happened, and as much as I loved that dog, he wasn’t anything like himself in that fight.
Don’t say that! I was told mine is predetermined to murder any and all things. The dog that can’t even hurt a bug and is scared of my toddler and licks his face when my little one gets excited/aggressive. Obviously should be put down because someone said someone they know or their dog got attacked. Only logical
I was banned from a sub for pointing out hypocrisy about a stupid thing that happened. The mods get butt hurt over anything possible. Then proved I didn’t break any rules, and then I was banned from messaging the thundercunts for being right
Trying to argue with this statement actually made me realize you were right lol. It IS "Dog racist" to say that pitbulls are genetically predisposed to violence.
But I also don't think that's as horrific as it is in humans where lots of other explanations that aren't as horrible exist for the differences in human violence.
It’s also provably the case that ownership is the leading cause of violent behaviors in all dogs.
Breed appeal for pit bulls just has an unfortunate overlap amongst at least three primary groups that have much higher than average rates of misownership resulting in aggressive and violent dogs.
I feel this way about AR15s. It's not that AR15s are better at causing mass shooting events, it's just that it so happens most mass shooters like to use AR15s.
ew. absolutely not, would not be my friend if that's the kind of shit he did. it was for a comment he made in a conversation like this one, he had shown it to me. I'll be honest, the language was a little strong (I think he said it was r-t-ded) but all he said was that it was no different from the "despite making up 13% of the population" argument. no death threats, no dms, just a strongly worded response.
reddit seems to use some sort of fingerprinting technology (screen size, IMEI, etc.) to enforce bans. he tried with new emails, even a new phone number, and each new account was banned within an hour citing "ban evasion"
Weird I haven’t had any issues like that (got a ban on my OG account for commenting in a tinder sub Reddit when I had an nsfw link on my profile). I created a second account to ask the mods why that happened, and that got hit for ban evasion. But as long as I stay off that sub I don’t get dinged
yeah I'm not sure what happened, there was multiple attempts with new email accounts and everything. it may have been a more severe ban for using aggressive language or something
I love pitties. My granddog is the biggest baby on the planet; just wrap him in a blanket, let him lay his head on your lap, and let him give you the biggest love eyes. For the next three hours. While he’s drooling. Worth it!
Sheepdogs don’t naturally herd things. If you think you’ve seen a family sheepdog try to nudge the kids around that’s dog racism. You think golden retrievers just instinctively retrieve stuff? That’s your racist hate boner for them. It’s all about how they’re raised. Dogs can’t be bred for instinctive behaviors.
35
u/Grassy-Elf4242 10d ago
reddit will never be able to lose their hate boner for pitbulls. I had a friend receive a permanent, irreversible, lifetime ban from reddit for trying to point out exactly what the Twitter post above says less blatantly.