Submitted by AphidGenocide t3_z79jke in rva
stinkemrpink t1_iy8ezdg wrote
Reply to comment by xDocFearx in No criminal charges for owner of pit bull that killed 88 year old woman by AphidGenocide
That’s not true, bully breeds are bred to be docile towards humans and German shepherds, Labrador retrievers, and Dobermans are statistically more likely to be aggressive than a “pit” is
xDocFearx t1_iy8i2du wrote
…..no….statistically there are more bites from labs…while labs have been the number one breed for 31 years…and pits aren’t even in the top 10…..out of the last 521 fatal dog attacks…346 were from pits. Stop lying to yourself because they’re cute
stinkemrpink t1_iy8javf wrote
I’m not, I’m not even a dog person. Per population, labs are more aggressive than pits. Look at what the the CDC and AKC have to say on it, shelters and police don’t even DNA test the “pits” they do reports on and the guidelines they use in a lot of cities and states would label a dog with clear pug characteristics as a pit bull. Experts also agree that owner behavior is the biggest qualifying factor in dog temperament, and breed bans lead directly to animal mistreatment. The best thing you can do to stop what you seem to think is a pit bull epidemic is to stop spreading anecdotal evidence that is used to gain an emotional response out of people.
xDocFearx t1_iy8k5lt wrote
Anyone who has any experience with dogs knows that badly trained pits are far more dangerous than badly trained labs. Aggressive does not always equate dangerous as well.
stinkemrpink t1_iy8l252 wrote
I’m actually a registered behaviorist who grew up in a vet clinic and working with rescues, that’s why I’m so passionate about breed bans and “pit” misinformation! Just more partial to cats. Labs and pitbulls are equally capable of inflicting equal harm on a human being, they’re big animals that should be treated well to foster good behaviors and a healthier dog population.
xDocFearx t1_iy8ltxc wrote
“Equally capable” is completely irrelevant and I highly doubt it since the pit has a much higher bite force and they’re much more likely to rip/ tear or hold on. You’re grasping at straws and you know it. Would you rather be attacked by a lab or a pit Bull? Be honest.
stinkemrpink t1_iy8mvs0 wrote
Pitbull, the bite strength myth is a… myth and they tend to be submissive. Labs are tenacious, I wouldn’t want to cross an angry one. But tbh what I really wouldn’t want to cross is a human that hates pitbulls https://www.whsv.com/content/news/Man-sentenced-to-5-years-for-killing-Tommie-the-pit-bull-558575931.html
xDocFearx t1_iy8mzf7 wrote
You realize bite strength can be measured…right? In psi?
[deleted] t1_iy8uhk6 wrote
[removed]
EJH-RVA t1_iye6dbf wrote
AFF is hardly a credible source of information. They will support your narrative though. 🤦♀️
stinkemrpink t1_iye854m wrote
Revised, with a pubmed study on the average strength of a dog bite to compare a pitbull’s bite force. They don’t have weak jaws, but they have a comparable bite force to that of a Golden Retriever and one weaker than the American Bulldog’s. They are normal dogs.
Breed bans on dogs lead directly to the mistreatment of animals, which, scientifically, leads to poorly behaved dogs. The anti-pitbull misinformation you’re trying to push gets dogs and people killed, and it is always important to keep that in mind after a tragic accident like this one, because that is when anti-breed legislation tends to get passed.
And the website I’ve seen you cite, dogsbite.org, is a misinformation website. The CDC can be an excellent resource that goes into why dog bite reporting isn’t always reliable.
EJH-RVA t1_iyeae1w wrote
This medical study says otherwise: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8597704/
Or this one: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165587618305950?via%3Dihub
There are many studies that prove pit bulls pose a greater danger than other breeds. Spreading misinformation that claims they’re just like any other breed is what’s getting people and pets hurt.
stinkemrpink t1_iyee78r wrote
Well that leads back to what the CDC’s study on dog bites found, and what the American Veterinary Medical Association, AKC and ASPCA have to say about it, they do not DNA test the “pitbulls” that are being reported. There are a LOT of flaws with dog bite reporting. A lot of places use guidelines that would identify a pug as a pitbull. Literally. And with the reputation that pitbulls have, a lot of mutts that have bitten people are defacto labeled as pits. The CDC’s own report heavily cautions the use of its own data on pits because of these mitigating factors. They stopped collecting data on dog bites after their most recent report, because of the flaws in reporting and how misleading reports are. The doctors in the study you linked are using the same information the CDC warns about, because it is flawed.
Pits are not born more dangerous than other dogs. Studies have shown that they exhibit less preternatural aggression towards humans than one of the most popular family dogs, Labrador Retrievers. Studies have shown that dog aggression is directly linked to owner behavior. Studies have also shown that breed specific legislation hurts dogs and people. You, by advocating against pitbulls because of flawed, anecdotal evidence, are making the problem worse.
I am using these links to back up what countless of veterinarians, animal rescuers, and behaviorists have told me about pitbulls. I trust the experts, not fearmongerers. I don’t even like pitbulls, they’re too clingy! I get that it’s the internet and anonymous and probably not a big deal to you, but this misinformation kills dogs and people.
https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/breed-specific-legislation
https://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-statements/position-statement-pit-bulls
https://www.avma.org/javma-news/2017-11-15/dangerous-dog-debate
EJH-RVA t1_iyefoiz wrote
Where is this study showing animal aggression comes from owner behavior? That contradicts the APBT breed standard, which clearly states that animal aggression should exist in the breed. 🤔
stinkemrpink t1_iyehvmv wrote
Well it was referenced and cited in at least one of the links I provided, but here it is again.
https://medwelljournals.com/abstract/?doi=javaa.2009.336.342
And where did you find the breed standard, because that is straight up false. Some pitbulls were bred to fight dogs, but ALL were bred to be friendly towards humans and aggression towards humans is uncharacteristic of the breed. The dog fighting pits were especially bred to be friendly towards humans so that the aggression from a fight wouldn’t carry over to their handler. Here’s the UK standard for pitbulls:
https://www.ukcdogs.com/american-pit-bull-terrier
Since the American Kennel Club doesn’t recognize Pitbull Terrier, I’ll include their breed standard for the American Staffordshire Terrier, the Pitbull’s close relative and a breed that is often confused for a Pitbull. They might be prone to aggression towards other dogs, but they are bred to be docile towards humans.
EJH-RVA t1_iyekji0 wrote
I didn’t say they were bred for human aggression. I said dog aggression is in the breed standard. It’s stated in the UKC standard you linked above. Although, I’ll concede that it doesn’t say they should be dog aggressive, just that they are.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments