Teddy (left), and Sampson (right)

  • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I am convinced this is a troll.

    Retaliation to haters posted in a wholesome sub.

    Pit Bulls being the most hated breed of dog out there (and for good reason).

    OP calling everyone a “Dog Racist”

    Each year 60% to 80% of dog attacks are caused by a single breed, fuck these animals. A Chihuahua may be more aggressive, but a person can easily fight those things off, a pit will lock onto anything and won’t release till they’re dead.

    Retrievers retrieve, Pointers point & Pit Bulls are made to fight, its in their nature.

    Edit: go ahead and down vote OP. Watch as that doesn’t change my opinion.

    • Echolynx@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah, I wouldn’t say I’m a hater. I just have a healthy skepticism driven by statistics and a distaste for the way the breed is marketed/treated by people.

    • WamGams@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Just a head’s up but not a single police department in the nation DNA tests or even has a spot on their reports to label which specific breed of dog caused the attack, there is also roughly a dozen different breeds on the list of dogs commonly mistaken for pits.

      Anybody telling you pits are responsible for any percentage of dog attacks is lying by giving a number not scientifically achieved.

      • Cloudless ☼@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        In 2009, the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia released a five-year review of dog-bite injuries. The review states that 51 percent of attacks were made by pit bulls.

        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19644273/

        In 2009, another study was published by the American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology. The study ran for 15 years and it has concluded that pit bulls, German Shepherds, and Rottweilers are among the most common breeds that cause fatal dog attacks in Kentucky State.

        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19696575/

        In 2011, the Annals of Surgery published a study, which concluded that Pitbull attacks lead to more expensive hospital bills, higher risk of death, and higher morbidity rates compared to other breeds of dogs.

        https://journals.lww.com/annalsofsurgery/Abstract/2011/04000/Mortality,_Mauling,_and_Maiming_by_Vicious_Dogs.23.aspx

        • WamGams@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Your data was true 13-15 years ago, doesn’t mean it is true today.

            • WamGams@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              It is quite strange to me that the only time I receive responses to 10 month old comments, whether on here or reddit, it’s only regarding pitt bulls.

              Must be a slow day on r/pitbullhate’s private discord.

          • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            Doesn’t mean it’s wrong either; try to provide something to say otherwise.

            Also how old does data need to be before it’s dismissed as ‘too old’?

            • WamGams@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              That’s up to you.

              What other subjects do you accept almost 20 year old data on? Do you go back 50 years? What is the cut off for you in all subjects, or is pit bulls the only subject you don’t have a standard for?

              • Black_Gulaman@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                did pitbull behavior change in 20 years. they suddenly became goody good dogs?

                i’d say it’s relevant until today and well into the future.

      • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        there is also roughly a dozen different breeds on the list of dogs commonly mistaken for pits.

        Do you have any evidence to support this statement? It would need to be pretty substantial to offset the large proportion of Pit Bull breeds.

        I dont say this to be dismissive, I would actually be pretty interested in reading what you have.

        • Mango@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          When my dumb ass downstairs neighbor hears the kittens playing, she flies into a rage about my pitbull making noise. The hate causes the statistics, not the breed.

      • HawtTism@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Uhm….what about 99% of videos ever posted about someone being attacked by a dog. And nobody is surprised when it’s a pitbull.

        • WamGams@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          To be clear, people who advocate for the extermimation of all bully breeds are not claiming that pitbulls account for 99% of all attacks.

          So right out of the gate you have decided to make the point you are “debating” more extreme than the most extreme right wing nutcases already part of the conversation.

          Better luck rage baiting somebody else. Maybe start out reasonable and then ramp up the insanity slowly instead of coming out of the gate so hot next time.

          • HawtTism@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            To be clear, I said “99% of videos ever posted about someone being attacked by a dog. And nobody is surprised when it’s a pitbull.” YouTube “attacked by dog” - it’s almost always a pitbull. You misconstrued what I said, and twisted it into some crazy “right-wing” topic. You’re simply wrong.

            • WamGams@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              I’m not looking at 99% pit bull attack videos though on YouTube.

              Now, everybody has a different search results targeted directly to them by Google. If Google is only showing you pit bull attacks, it’s because they decided that is the content you are willing to engage with.

              And seeing that you create accounts to argue 8 month old comments that are defending pit bulls, it seems pretty clear that Google has assumed correctly about you.

              • HawtTism@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I just started using Lemmy. But thanks for responding to an old comment!

    • peregrin5@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      fuck these animals

      Eh the animals did nothing wrong. They didn’t ask to be born as the artificially selected abominations we’ve made them into. Fuck people who continue to breed these animals and don’t spay/neuter their pits.

    • illi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’d love a study on what kind of masters the bloodthirsty dogs have. I’m willing to bet those dogs had masters that encouraged the behavior or got them because the breed is macho and never intended to be responsible about it.

      • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 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
          0
          ·
          11 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
            1
            ·
            11 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”.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      This is bullshit. In more than half of dog bites the breed is unknown. So that’s the end of your line of reasoning. You simply don’t know and cannot say their “nature.”

      They were bred for hunting. Some people used some of them for fighting dogs years after they were first bred and used for decades as hunting dogs. Of the few that were used in fighting, dogs that bit humans were not allowed to fight and so were euthanized

      Edit: abject know-nothings and science deniers downvoting me.

      • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        In more than half of dog bites the breed is unknown. So that’s the end of your line of reasoning.

        Are you able to provide a link or a study stating this, or are you just providing your opinion here? Happy to have this discussion. But you seem to just be angrily dismissing my comment out of disagreement rather than facts.

        The bull-and-terrier was a breed of dog developed in the United Kingdom in the early 19th century for the blood sports of dog fighting and rat baiting. It was created by crossing the ferocious, thickly muscled Old English Bulldog with the agile, lithe, feisty Black and Tan Terrier. The aggressive Old English Bulldog, which was bred for bear and bull baiting, was often also pitted against its own kind in organised dog fights, but it was found that lighter, faster dogs were better suited to dogfighting than the heavier Bulldog. To produce a lighter, faster, more agile dog that retained the courage and tenacity of the Bulldog, outcrosses from local terriers were tried, and ultimately found to be successful.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull

        They were made primary for dog fighting, and fighting is ingrained into their nature, in the same way that retrievers were made to retrieve. I have also provided information in another comment here that breaks down the fatalities caused by dog breeds each year and pit bulls kill more than all other breeds combined.

        Even if they were bred for something else entirely a singular breed of dogs causing the majority of fatalities each year is clearly dangerous. So dangerous that something should be done to ensure the public’s safety.

        • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Every study states it itself. There’s always a category for “unknown,” and if for some reason there isn’t such a category, you know the source you are reading is some full of shit organization that at best is misleading people just to collect money and at worst is only talking about dogs so they can push pseudo genetic science including eugenics and blood lible.

          Your narrative from Wikipedia is some hysterical author focusing on one group of dogs. It’s also undeniable that training is an exponentially more significant factor in animal behavior than genetics, so let’s assume they were bred for fighting other dogs at a dog fight, so what? What does that have to do with dogs biting humans in their own homes or at the park? It’s a stupid argument you’re making.

    • cor@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      breed was responsible for 22.5% of bites across all studies. Mixed breeds were a close second at 21.2% and German Shepherds were the third most dangerous breed, involved in 17.8% of bite incidents.

      where the fuck do you get 60-80%???

      also, 100% of dog fights use pit bulls…

      abused dogs lead to bites….

      aka, it’s the owner’s fault.