• snipgan
    link
    fedilink
    54
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Unsurprising. Large “power breeds” like pit bulls I have always found questionable to have.

    No restrictions or licenses? No muzzles at least?

    A good thing they banned them.

    Though I still dislike the outright malice and hate I see when a pit bull in a photo might be doing nothing but staring at a sunset. A bit hate crazy.

    • @starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -11
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Literally all I’m saying is that the vast majority of pit bulls aren’t violent. I fucking said I’m in favor of spaying and neutering the breed out of existence because the few that do become violent are excessively dangerous.

      • @crapwittyname@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        26
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        If you’re a dog owner and you’re paying attention, then your personal experience should include the following truth: any dog can go postal. If you then combine this with the knowledge that pitbulls are much more deadly than other dogs when being agressive, then you must reach the conclusion that this breed should be banned, even though that is admittedly a sad conclusion.

        • @starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -13
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Literally all I’m saying is that the vast majority of pit bulls aren’t violent. I fucking said I’m in favor of spaying and neutering the breed out of existence because the few that do become violent are excessively dangerous.

          • @Tavarin@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            910 months ago

            I know a handful of pits who have bitten and severely injured people. For your positive anecdote there is a negative to match.

            • @starman2112@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -14
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Literally all I’m saying is that the vast majority of pit bulls aren’t violent. I fucking said I’m in favor of spaying and neutering the breed out of existence because the few that do become violent are excessively dangerous.

              • ferret
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1210 months ago

                Technically it is disengenuous to say statistically and then make up a statistic

                • @starman2112@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -11
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  Literally all I’m saying is that the vast majority of pit bulls aren’t violent. I fucking said I’m in favor of spaying and neutering the breed out of existence because the few that do become violent are excessively dangerous.

                  • @themajesticdodo@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    710 months ago

                    Assuming an average lifespan of roughly 10 years, there’s a roughly 1 in 1,000 chance that a given pit bull will ever attack a human or animal.

                    So 1 in every 1000 will attack a human? Is that actually a good argument for pit bulls?

          • originalucifer
            link
            fedilink
            510 months ago

            i am a dog owner, and know many dog owners, and have personally known 2 neighbors who lost pets due to pits who went ‘postal’

            anecdotes gunna anecdote

          • @crapwittyname@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            210 months ago

            Can this possibly be true?
            If a dog switches to aggressive mode and stops listening to commands, trying to attack (another dog, a cat, a deer, a bird, a human) that’s what I mean by “going postal”. In most cases they are restrained on leash. The outcome, and the target (for the sake of this argument) are not important. It is not possible to predict accurately when they will do this.

          • @WldFyre@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1310 months ago

            Every dog on the planet is more aggressive than all other dogs on the planet?

            • Instigate
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -610 months ago

              Well surely it’s a spectrum that people are advocating an arbitrary line be placed on. Once this breed is gone, what about the next most aggressive breed? They then become the most aggressive breed and there’ll be calls to weed them out too. Dogs kill more humans than any other non-human vertebrate in the world by a very long shot - getting rid of one breed isn’t going to reduce that number to zero.

              To clarify, I’m not against the move of banning the breed at all, I’m just acutely aware that it’s making an arbitrary distinction.

              • @Tavarin@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                410 months ago

                Pitbulls are deadlier than all other breeds combined. They are 10 times as deadly as the next most aggressive breed. You don’t need to pull out the slippery slope fallacy, when the line is very clearly at pitbulls.

              • @Carlo@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                Dogs kill more humans than any other non-human vertebrate in the world by a very long shot

                I looked into this, based on some other comments. Turns out it’s snakes. Various sources list dogs at between 13,000 and 35,000 deaths per year, and snakes in a range of 75,000-100,000.

                Edit: but if we’re talking one species, dogs might edge out the deadliest snake. Really hard to say, based on the data I was able to find.

              • @themajesticdodo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -110 months ago

                That is not a good argument, it is dishonest and disingenuous.

                You’re actually using the same logic people used to try and avoid gay marriage.

        • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -1810 months ago

          Pitbulls are not the deadliest dog out there. Not by a long shot. They’re just the ones people like to make aggressive.

            • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -510 months ago

              There are dogs that are bred to help bring down bears. Some asshole breeding for noise and muscle does not make the most dangerous dog.

              • @crapwittyname@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                110 months ago

                Pitbulls are the most deadly breed of dog, to humans. This is a solid concrete fact. There are reasons for this, and evidence to back it up. Your thing about bears is irrelevant, unless those dogs have been proven to be more dangerous to humans than pitbulls, which they haven’t.

                • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -210 months ago

                  Sure, just ignore all context. Big number bad. Keep playing whack a mole wondering why the problem never gets fixed.

                  • @crapwittyname@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    110 months ago

                    Problem is pitbulls. Fix with ban. Simple. Context is evidence. Context is bloodthirsty breeding program. Understand?

          • @starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            310 months ago

            It’s important to understand what people mean when they say things. These people aren’t saying that pit bulls are more physically capable of killing people than any other breed, they’re saying that they’re responsible for more deaths than any other breed.

            It’s a bit like saying the flu is deadler than ebola. Ebola may have a higher mortality rate, but it’s so much less likely to infect people that it has a much smaller kill count.

      • 1bluepixel
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1210 months ago

        People with access to verifiable data overlook the appearance of safety to express a legitimate concern about a breed that’s demonstrably more likely to kill? What dorks!

        • @starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -11
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Literally all I’m saying is that the vast majority of pit bulls aren’t violent. I fucking said I’m in favor of spaying and neutering the breed out of existence because the few that do become violent are excessively dangerous.

          • @gears@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            710 months ago

            My childhood pitbull bit me in the face and I have permanent face scarring from it. I had to get 60+ stitches to reconstruct my face.

            It’s not a valid point to say “most don’t attack people” when the breed is much more likely to attack a person compared to other breeds. Then it’s made worse by the fact they’ve been bred to be extra good at attacking.