Teddy (left), and Sampson (right)

  • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Plenty of breeds of dogs are bought by bad owners with the intention of being used as attack dogs. But there is no way you can write off such an overwhelming percentage of pit bull attacks to this reasoning.

    Every time a pit bull attacks anything you will always see this argument brought up to defend the breed. If this was truly the case other breeds of dogs would be high up on the list too (Rottweilers and German Shepards come to mind). But they aren’t even close to the percentage of Pit attacks.

    Some attacks can be attributed to this fact, but because pit bulls alone make a majority of attacks across all breeds indicates that this cannot be the case.

    Additionally out of all breeds of dog, I couldn’t think of a worse breed biting me. All dogs attack, but many bite and release, pits don’t.

    • Pilferjinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, pitbulls aren’t dangerous for the occurrence of attacks but because when they do they cause the most damage. Most people don’t report a small dog if they cause no major damage.

      • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        Exactly. Which is the main reason I posted the fatalities graph instead of just attacks. People aren’t as likely to report a small dog biting them, but you have to keep a report of deaths caused.

        And an average of 67% of all fatalities is far beyond the expected amount caused by “bad owners”.