Teddy (left), and Sampson (right)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (68 children)
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (38 children)

    Just a head's up but not a single police department in the nation DNA tests or even has a spot on their reports to label which specific breed of dog caused the attack, there is also roughly a dozen different breeds on the list of dogs commonly mistaken for pits.

    Anybody telling you pits are responsible for any percentage of dog attacks is lying by giving a number not scientifically achieved.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    In 2009, the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia released a five-year review of dog-bite injuries. The review states that 51 percent of attacks were made by pit bulls.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19644273/

    In 2009, another study was published by the American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology. The study ran for 15 years and it has concluded that pit bulls, German Shepherds, and Rottweilers are among the most common breeds that cause fatal dog attacks in Kentucky State.

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19696575/

    In 2011, the Annals of Surgery published a study, which concluded that Pitbull attacks lead to more expensive hospital bills, higher risk of death, and higher morbidity rates compared to other breeds of dogs.

    https://journals.lww.com/annalsofsurgery/Abstract/2011/04000/Mortality,_Mauling,_and_Maiming_by_Vicious_Dogs.23.aspx

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago* (24 children)

    there is also roughly a dozen different breeds on the list of dogs commonly mistaken for pits.

    Do you have any evidence to support this statement? It would need to be pretty substantial to offset the large proportion of Pit Bull breeds.

    I dont say this to be dismissive, I would actually be pretty interested in reading what you have.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago

    fuck these animals

    Eh the animals did nothing wrong. They didn't ask to be born as the artificially selected abominations we've made them into. Fuck people who continue to breed these animals and don't spay/neuter their pits.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (7 children)

    This is bullshit. In more than half of dog bites the breed is unknown. So that's the end of your line of reasoning. You simply don't know and cannot say their "nature."

    They were bred for hunting. Some people used some of them for fighting dogs years after they were first bred and used for decades as hunting dogs. Of the few that were used in fighting, dogs that bit humans were not allowed to fight and so were euthanized

    Edit: abject know-nothings and science deniers downvoting me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They were bred explicitly for fighting. First fighting bulls in pits, hence Pitbull. That was outlawed. It was deemed unfair to pit different animals against each other in a fight. So pitbulls were then bred to fight other dogs.

    Pitbulls were killed when they wouldn't fight, or were beat by another dog. The breeders didn't care about them bitting humans. They wouldn't keep them as pets as they were for fighting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    In more than half of dog bites the breed is unknown. So that's the end of your line of reasoning.

    Are you able to provide a link or a study stating this, or are you just providing your opinion here? Happy to have this discussion. But you seem to just be angrily dismissing my comment out of disagreement rather than facts.

    The bull-and-terrier was a breed of dog developed in the United Kingdom in the early 19th century for the blood sports of dog fighting and rat baiting. It was created by crossing the ferocious, thickly muscled Old English Bulldog with the agile, lithe, feisty Black and Tan Terrier. The aggressive Old English Bulldog, which was bred for bear and bull baiting, was often also pitted against its own kind in organised dog fights, but it was found that lighter, faster dogs were better suited to dogfighting than the heavier Bulldog. To produce a lighter, faster, more agile dog that retained the courage and tenacity of the Bulldog, outcrosses from local terriers were tried, and ultimately found to be successful.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

    They were made primary for dog fighting, and fighting is ingrained into their nature, in the same way that retrievers were made to retrieve. I have also provided information in another comment here that breaks down the fatalities caused by dog breeds each year and pit bulls kill more than all other breeds combined.

    Even if they were bred for something else entirely a singular breed of dogs causing the majority of fatalities each year is clearly dangerous. So dangerous that something should be done to ensure the public's safety.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

    Every study states it itself. There's always a category for "unknown," and if for some reason there isn't such a category, you know the source you are reading is some full of shit organization that at best is misleading people just to collect money and at worst is only talking about dogs so they can push pseudo genetic science including eugenics and blood lible.

    Your narrative from Wikipedia is some hysterical author focusing on one group of dogs. It's also undeniable that training is an exponentially more significant factor in animal behavior than genetics, so let's assume they were bred for fighting other dogs at a dog fight, so what? What does that have to do with dogs biting humans in their own homes or at the park? It's a stupid argument you're making.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    breed was responsible for 22.5% of bites across all studies. Mixed breeds were a close second at 21.2% and German Shepherds were the third most dangerous breed, involved in 17.8% of bite incidents.

    where the fuck do you get 60-80%???

    also, 100% of dog fights use pit bulls…

    abused dogs lead to bites….

    aka, it’s the owner’s fault.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    I'd love a study on what kind of masters the bloodthirsty dogs have. I'm willing to bet those dogs had masters that encouraged the behavior or got them because the breed is macho and never intended to be responsible about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (11 replies)