Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_itnr2h7 wrote

Most residential apartment communities ban them and other generally more violent/aggressive breeds. Best bet is to either call and ask about the pet policy or read the application. Wouldn’t be surprised if other residents complained about you having one though.

6

TCPottery t1_itnupke wrote

Pit bulls are no more vicious than a Shih Tzu. They are stronger, yes, but not more vicious. It is the viciousness of the owner/trainer which causes all the pain and anguish. The humans are the dangerous ones.

−12

[deleted] t1_itnw82s wrote

Sure, definitely more nurture than nature. That said, I still wouldnt want my kids or my cat around one. Better safe than sorry. Of course ‘not all pit bulls’ but im just not willing to take a chance on someone training their dog properly.

5

[deleted] t1_itnxrim wrote

Yep. Most pit attacks are from bad owners, but some are from perfectly fine owners. Sadly we did this to them with decades of breeding. Time to let the breed die off and chalk it up to a mistake.

3

[deleted] t1_itnx2xq wrote

False and absurdly easy to prove. How many kids have been killed by SZ? How many hospitalized?

3

pittiedaddy t1_ito1igx wrote

What proof? Post the same reposted videos from the hate sub, or "evidence" from dogbites.org?

2

[deleted] t1_ito25ir wrote

Literally search “fatal dog attacks by year in US”. Click any link. They all say the same thing. The majority of fatal attacks are by pits. The only other breed that holds a candle is Rotts, which I also think should be banned. It goes from 67% of fatal attacks (pits) to like 3% from the next highest breed.

2

AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_itpum5u wrote

Actually they all say that in the majority of cases the breed is unknown.

2

[deleted] t1_itpy1rc wrote

False. The data quite clearly shows Pitts are responsible for 60-70% of fatal attacks, even before you count in mixed breeds, which are almost all pitts as well. What source did you draw this conclusion from?

1

TCPottery t1_itnx98k wrote

Again, try to comprehend what you read. Those cases started with people who trained the dog to attack, to defend. Reading is fundamental. So is critical thinking.

−11

[deleted] t1_itnxw1o wrote

Lol I teach reading and critical thinking for a living. Some attacks from pits are from bad owners, some aren’t. The breed is fundamentally broken on a genetic level.

2

AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_itpusn6 wrote

Here comes the false argument about genetics and the pitch for eugenics and ethnic cleansing.....

Wait for it....

1

[deleted] t1_itpxm29 wrote

We’ve been playing god with dog breeds for over a thousand years. Lol @ eugenics like this is some kind of Nazi experiment. We created the breed by selective breeding, we can admit we made an error and let it die off. We already practiced eugenics in every dog breed we have made dummy. My mom’s lab is a result of eugenics, just like my sister’s pit.

I don’t particularly care whether it’s genes, training, or the color of their nose. When one breed is responsible for the majority of fatal dog attacks, you just get rid of the breed. There’s hundreds of other breeds to choose from that don’t kill 30-40 people every year, with almost 1:3 of those being children.

1

AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_itt11oj wrote

>We’ve been playing god with dog breeds for over a thousand years. Lol @ eugenics like this is some kind of Nazi experiment. We created the breed by selective breeding,

No, dude. It's just the next intellectual mistake in the line of thinking that you are wrongly following.

You have fundamentally misunderstood genetics and behavior. And that's fine because you're not a zoologist or veterinarian.

It's not fine though when you're being blatantly manipulated into defending the exact false logic that actual Nazis used to justify the Holocaust, including the false concepts of racial hygiene and biological determinism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_hygiene

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_determinism

Do you recognize and agree that you are saying identical things about races of dogs as Hitler and the Nazis said about races of people?

Now that it has been directly pointed out to you, do you see how your messaging might be used by foreign intelligence services as they run social media campaigns to amplify extreme, far right ideology, such as racial hygiene and biological determinism?

Do you now accept you are fundamentally wrong about the science of genetics and behavior and you sound indistinguishable from someone arguing the earth is flat?

Do you accept that you were demonstrably incorrect about the history of the breed and what it was selectively breed for?

And finally do you appreciate how selective breeding of domesticated animals and man's best friend is not the same as doing it to man?

I don't find your dangerous and uninformed reasoning funny at all. I find it stupid and immature.

1

mattyzucks t1_ito03to wrote

I weep for those children. Scary that you teach kids

−2

[deleted] t1_ito0hbp wrote

You are babbling. Implying that being against a breed of animal as a pet makes me a psycho or a bad teacher. Yea, I’m a bad teacher because I don’t think we need the single breed of dog around that’s responsible for 40/50 fatal dog attacks each year.

Someone needs a quick trip to the therapist. You are getting absurdly triggered by people having an opinion.

4

pittiedaddy t1_itnu5jg wrote

Not even remotely true since it's state law that towns cannot discriminate against any breed.

−14

[deleted] t1_itnupio wrote

No, that applies to municipalities passing ordinances, not apartment complexes. The latter are free to make any regulations they like.

Reading my lease rn lol, pits are banned. Also includes everything from Rottweilers to Akitas. People ignore the rules pretty frequently but its right in the lease. I live in Stamford for reference.

7

pittiedaddy t1_itnvlcy wrote

>Most residential communities

You made it sound like residential neighborhoods. Yes individual complexes and landlords can. Hell I rented places here that only allow cats and no dogs.

−2

[deleted] t1_itnvwdc wrote

Changed. They’re banned in almost every complex in the city. Wish people actually followed those restrictions but 🤷🏼‍♂️

0

Ordinary_Guitar_5074 t1_itnxmlo wrote

That’s dumb. They should have done the opposite. They should ban pit bulls on the state level.

−1

[deleted] t1_itnxsmp wrote

I think pre 2013, towns could make laws banning them.

1

AhbabaOooMaoMao t1_itpv9pw wrote

Laws have to have a rational basis to hold up.

1

Ordinary_Guitar_5074 t1_itpxmks wrote

You mean like data and statistics about which breed is involved in the most attacks? About which breed is currently the most abused? About which breed currently occupies shelters in the greatest number? About which breeds have the strongest jaws and which tend to inflict the worst injuries? Because 100% I agree with you that that data supports such a law.

1

Ordinary_Guitar_5074 t1_itpxryq wrote

If you can ban assault rifles you can ban pit bulls. The Constitution doesn’t guarantee your right to a dog.

1

BeadyEyedThieves t1_itpz5zi wrote

4.7 million dog bites in the US annually, 800k requiring medical attention. Dozens of deaths, most of which are from shitbulls. Seems pretty rational to me.

Dogs should be banned outright, they're fucking nuisance creatures, and disgustingly unhygienic. One barking dog ruins an entire neighborhood's right to peace and quiet, and it's practically impossible to find one without some stupid asshole that wants all the positives and none of the responsibility. Fuck every dog owner on earth. Most self absorbed, vapid douchebags to exist.

No, your dog isn't interesting and nothing about it makes you interesting. Your a slave to an ungrateful, nuisance shitbeast that only "likes" you because you feed it. Such a great friend.

0