Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

matramepapi t1_j446o74 wrote

Reply to comment by External_Staff_300 in Pit Bull Owner Issued Citations in Willard Playground Attack: 'I know the dogs have to go' by Realistic-Sun3480

Oh my god. Small breeds don’t maul and kill people. Pit bulls absolutely are the problem. Literally bred for game/dogfighting with such a high prey drive that blunt force and mace can’t detach its jaw. The problem is the idiot owners AND the idiot breed. These dogs are ticking time bombs.

38

HarryTheHangryHippo t1_j449fv9 wrote

Idiot owners is correct. Idiot breed is not. They are a very intelligent and loyal dogs. Little dogs don't have the physical ability to maul/kill people. That doesn't mean they don't attack/bite people frequently. And this generally comes down to the fact that people see them as "cute little babies that require no training". All dogs were wild at one point, and people have to remember that. No matter how long they've been kept as companions and domesticated things can happen. People need to do their own due diligence with training, as well as researching the type of dog they are getting before they get them. Yes we have regulations in place inside of Greene county because bully breeds as they were bred for many many years will not let go if they latch on. I don't disagree with the regulations, but if owners would actually abide by them we wouldn't have ever had this problem. Or if people would be good and intelligent dog owners we wouldn't have this problem.

−12

External_Staff_300 t1_j44axyl wrote

Exactly this. Except there are instances where small breeds have attacked and killed kids, babies, and people unable to fight them off.

−18

[deleted] t1_j44ac5s wrote

[removed]

−12

matramepapi t1_j44gz50 wrote

Okay. Sure, two small dogs cited killing people. Only two. Versus 60% + of dog bite fatalities coming from pit bulls and pit Bull mixes . And this is just one site. But sure, it’s totally the owners. Not the breed. I clearly know nothing about dogs. /s

20

External_Staff_300 t1_j44ikak wrote

And have you ever heard of a biased study? Maybe you should find a more reliable study than an injury lawyer trying to sell you a lawsuit. 😂

−5

matramepapi t1_j44jfra wrote

here’s another, scroll down. another. and one more! These are all sources not from an injury lawyer. Your point?

14

External_Staff_300 t1_j44la6x wrote

Ah, the dog hater Colleen Lynn and her fake studies to get donations. You should do better research.

https://adbadog.com/truth-behind-dogsbite-org/

"The conclusion of this science based study (not a conclusion based on the former’s wishful thinking) demonstrates that breed is not a contributing factor in dog bite fatalities, and breed specific legislation is not the solution for eliminating dog bite fatalities."

Maybe you should talk to people that actually know dogs, rather than seeking out sensationalized headlines and studies from lawyers?

Just a thought.

−1

matramepapi t1_j44lmw4 wrote

Sorry, dog expert. I’m done arguing with you. Statistics prove that you are wrong, pitbulls are an inherently violent breed with a strong tendency to seriously injure people. Bye bye nutter!

14

External_Staff_300 t1_j44lsg3 wrote

I'm not an expert. I just have a lot of experience with dogs of all kinds of breeds. And I have never seen a vicious dog that didn't have a stupid owner.

−2

matramepapi t1_j44lzzz wrote

Ah yes, because one person’s experience and anecdotal evidence is totally more reliable than statistics

9

External_Staff_300 t1_j44md28 wrote

I am one person and I am relating my personal experience. But you have also shown that you have zero issue with citing biased sources but balk when given actual studies from experts on dog behavior.

I already know I won't change your mind and I'm not trying to. All I am hoping is that someone who isn't as close minded will look at the actual information I've shared and get a little wiser about this issue.

You have a wonderful evening.

−1

Wrinklestiltskin t1_j46h569 wrote

I would like to point out that I've never owned a pitbull (don't ever plan to), and I am not invested in this topic. But I'd like to play devils advocate here in order to promote scientically literate discussion on the matter.

There are many confounding variables that impact studies on dog aggression and reporting of dog attacks.

For instance, this study (PDF warning) found a strong association between deviant criminal behavior and and ownership of high risk 'vicious' dogs. It's important to note the relatively small and localized sample in that study.

To the claim of putbulls being the most vicious breed, this study found that smaller breeds were in fact the most aggressive. A finding which has been replicated by other studies. There are many factors thought to influence this, including the growth factor gene.

Smaller dog attacks are also severely under-reported since they are not as concerning, which further skews the statistics on dog attacks to a very significant degree. Source. Also illustrated in that article is the prevalence of pitbull ownership in specific locations/demographics, which directly impacts the rate of attacks simply due the higher proportion of pitbulls in the given population.

I think it's important to weigh all of the facts, consider the conflicting studies, and address all of the confounding variables that are not controlled for in most of the studies assessing breed-specific violence.

To claim that pitbulls are the most aggressive breed is not a claim you can make with certainty from the scientific literature we have on the subject.

For people more unfamiliar confounding/third variable problems, here is a famous example:

Statistics show that as ice-cream sales rise, so does the rate of violent crime. You should not draw inferences of causation from correlations, but one might arrive at the false conclusion that ice-cream promotes violent behavior.

However, in actually, the third variable influencing both of those statistics is hot weather.

I'm not going to tell anyone what they should believe, but I encourage everyone to remain vigilant in scrutinizing all available scholarly information, avoid engaging in confirmation bias, and do not simply believe other redditors' comments at face value.

−1

External_Staff_300 t1_j44i66p wrote

4.5 million dog bites reported annually 800,000 need medical attention 30-50 deaths annually Only 10% can be attributed to a specific breed. And only 1 in 5 of that 10% is attributed to a pit bull. But go on, blame the breed.

The only reason pitbulls take up the news is because they're popular right now. Previously it was doberman, then rottweiler, then German Shepherds, and so on.

I guess pitbulls just wanted to wait their turn to be vicious?

−6

moonstone98524 t1_j44w6ml wrote

This “nanny dog” claim is absolute bullshit. There are no contemporary sources to back it up. NO dog is a “nanny” and it’s stupid and irresponsible to suggest otherwise. Dogs are animals, not child-minders. I owned a Newfoundland for 10+ years. That’s the dog breed “Nana” from Peter Pan is based on. And I never claimed he was a “nanny dog” and I never left him unsupervised with my kids despite his unbelievably sweet and gentle nature because HE WAS A DOG. Stop spewing this nanny lie. It is DANGEROUS to pretend a dog, ANY DOG, is a suitable babysitter. Jesus.

13

Speuter_Your_BBM t1_j44lcy6 wrote

Oh dear… this is embarrassing for you. You’re slamming someone else for not knowing anything about dogs, yet you claim that pit bulls were nanny dogs. Big yikes.

THIS IS A MYTH, started by Staffie breeder Lillian Rant in 1971 to distance the dogs from their fighting heritage. She called them “nursemaid” dogs. Check for any historical mention of “nanny dog” prior to 1971. You won’t find it. (Note: random Google blogs don’t count)

Please stop spreading this myth. It’s getting children killed. Every time you share this myth, you have the blood of dead children on your hands.

I’m going to share the pit bull EXPERTS that have publicly stated that pit bulls were NEVER nanny dogs. If pro-pit experts are saying this, please listen.

  1. The Pit Bull Advocates of America- It’s NOT All How They Are Raised/Nanny Dog Myth

  2. The Pit Bull Federation of South Africa

  3. Gudwulf’s Pit Bull Rescue

  4. Pit Bull Organization Bad Rap

  5. Ned Hardy Organization

As far as the PBFSA and Gudwulf’s; just visit their page and search the word “nanny” and you’ll find the info you need.

I’m begging you… please don’t ever spread this myth again.

Even if they ever were nanny dogs; the amount of horrid back yard breeding and number of dogs used for fighting would certainly not make that UNtrue today (they weren’t)… they kill and catastrophically injure more children every year than all other breeds combined.

Just THIS LAST WEEKEND PIT BULLS SCALPED TWO CHILDREN that were playing in their own neighborhoods.

11 year old Justin, GA, pulled off his bike and scalped by 3 bully breeds

7 Year old girl scalped and killed as she played in her own yard

This past October, American Bullies killed BOTH of a family’s children, age 2 and 5 months old. The family had owned the dogs for 8 years with zero incidents.

Please, please stop the myth.

9