Pit bulls are not inherently dangerous. They are very good family dogs really.
Any dog can be trained to be vicious.
Still, having the opposite opinion isn't worthy of a ban in any way.
Pit bulls were originally bred to protect children.
They are actually notoriously lovey and good with kids,
despite what all the vicious propaganda against them says.
Now, Dobermans, keep an eye on those sketchy fuckers.
For those reading the pro and anti Pitbull comments, they can be wonderful family dogs and they can be ultra aggressive and dangerous. They have been bred for both purposes. If you don't buy from a good breeder that can demonstrate and prove the dogs lineage you are taking a huge risk.
https://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-statements/position-statement-pit-bulls
The Argentine Dogo is another example. They are very often great family dogs but if you buy one that was bred by a meathead idiot it could kill someone. I work as a meter reader and we have been specifically trained to a avoid houses that have either dog as we do not know how these dogs have been bred.
I think a lot of people that own pitbulls, myself included, get uppity about the generalizations is that there are a number of other large breed and small breed dogs that have terrible temperament scores, some worse that pits by a good amount, but everyone seems to want to hate on pitbulls.
It's very frustrating.
Well, here is the breakdown of the top ten temperament scoring breeds, Pitbulls fall under #3 on the list.
https://barkpost.com/top-10-tolerant-breeds/
The American Temperament Test Society does the testing. For some reason their site isn't working for me, but here is a wayback machine archive from July 10th.
https://web.archive.org/web/20180710164353/https://atts.org/breed-statistics/statistics-page1/
Original page:
https://atts.org/breed-statistics/statistics-page1/
As you can see there, American Pitbull Terrier scored 87.4% on that, out of 931 dogs (of the breed) tested. There are a HUGE number of other breeds tested, even when you discount the ones with less than 500 individuals tested, that score a significant amount lower than the Pitbull.
Ooh the ATTS. Sorry to break these news to you but, it doesn’t measure aggression.
Carl Herkstroeter (president of the ATTS) said so himself: *”Just because a certain percentage of dogs in a certain breed fail, this does not necessarily indicate aggression. Dogs fail for other reasons, such as strong avoidance. If you look at our statistics just from a perspective of aggression or non-aggression, they can be very misleading."*
And I wouldn’t call the ATTS a very objective test, since they have an agenda behind it. From the website: *"Because of breed-specific dog legislation and negative publicity associated with many breeds of dogs, temperament testing has assumed an important role for today's dog fancier. The ATTS Temperament Test provides breeders a means for evaluating temperament and gives pet owners insight into their dog's behavior. It can have an impact on breeding programs and in educating owners about their dog's behavioral strengths and weaknesses as well as providing a positive influence on dog legislation"*
Also, you shouldn’t compare different breeds’ scores and pretend pits are better, because the ATTS website says: *”Comparing scores with other dogs is not a good idea. The test takes into consideration each breed's inherent tendencies."*
> ”Just because a certain percentage of dogs in a certain breed fail, this does not necessarily indicate aggression. Dogs fail for other reasons, such as strong avoidance. If you look at our statistics just from a perspective of aggression or non-aggression, they can be very misleading."
I'm sorry, but you have misunderstood the quoted section you put there. Just because it doesn't necessarily indicate aggression, does not equate the it not measuring aggression. Aggression still plays a *huge* role in determining breed temperament, I know this because I used to actually help rescue dogs and we had to give individual temperament assessments to dogs. That testing was based very closely on the ATTS testing, especially the aggression testing.
Secondly, while the objective is to respond to breed-specific legislation, it is done in a very impartial way.
Finally, while yes, using it alone to compare breeds isn't the greatest idea you can still get a general idea of comparative behavioral habits by looking at the breed scoring.
EDIT: Wait, I see. You weren't genuinely curious and you aren't looking for actual intelligent conversation about the topic. You mention agendas, when you obviously have your own as a regular poster on /r/BanPitBulls.
I find it funny that while I am having an intelligent, rational discussion with you, that you commented [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/BanPitBulls/comments/98rh6c/man_gets_mauled_in_the_middle_of_the_street_by/e4itdwf/) though. [Screen](https://i.imgur.com/HTbdHeg.png) in case the user deletes it.
The ATTS is not a reliable test, it measures other things, dogs are made to walk through a plastic carpet and listen to gunshots. Most dogs get scared. A pug, for example, would be startled and fail. A pit is more fearless than that and would pass.
The test also can be retaken and practised at home before you take it.
Pit bull fans also encourage each other to test sound dogs to make the breed score higher for their “cause”
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_PNESGwoU4lk/TRft57-Im2I/AAAAAAAAFZY/7Dh8PHA7Nbw/s1600/diane%2Bjessup%2Batts.jpg
So, I give you real, studied data, and you give me an anecdotal comment on a blog post? This is *after* you actively ignored context on a quote to try and support your argument? Oh, and also entirely ignored the fact that a frightened dog is more likely to bite or otherwise lash out, hence why it's a failing criteria for temperament?
Seriously, you haven't made a solid argument yet as to why you are right about this. The test is, definitively, going to have *some* flaws. That makes it no different than any other psyche test.
But, while that is true, it is also designed, like any good test, with that in mind and has mitigating stopgaps to attempt to prevent it.
Finally, in your above stumbles in attempting to prove me wrong, the only "source" you have given is linked from an anti-pit bull website. I used a data point source that is unbiased at the very least, where as you are attempting to cherry pick data points (miserably I might add) and use only things that support your side of things.
That's terribly intellectually dishonest.
> So, I give you real, studied data, and you give me an anecdotal comment on a blog post?
lol sorry but you haven’t shown any “real, studied data”.
> context on a quote to try and support your argument?
What context?
> Seriously, you haven't made a solid argument yet as to why you are right about this.
I’ve literally quoted the ATTS website on how it doesn’t work like how you think it works.
> The test is, definitively, going to have some flaws. That makes it no different than any other psyche test.
The test is straight up unreliable, yes. Psyche tests don’t let you “retake” them.
> But, while that is true, it is also designed, like any good test, with that in mind and has mitigating stopgaps to attempt to prevent it.
Do you even have source for that?
> only "source" you have given is linked from an anti-pit bull website.
It’s the words of Diane Jessup, one of the most famous pit bull owners there is. There’s a lot of unseen topics being talked about in pit bull forums.
The ATTS is not unbiased. They are fighting against BSL and that’s the ATTS’s purpose.
^(Hi, I'm a bot for linking direct images of albums with only 1 image)
**https://i.imgur.com/zfUuRoC.png**
^^[Source](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot) ^^| ^^[Why?](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot/blob/master/README.md) ^^| ^^[Creator](https://np.reddit.com/user/AUTplayed/) ^^| ^^[ignoreme](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=ignoreme&message=ignoreme) ^^| ^^[deletthis](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=delet%20this&message=delet%20this%20e4eqpsu)
^(Hi, I'm a bot for linking direct images of albums with only 1 image)
**https://i.imgur.com/bmpweF5.png**
^^[Source](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot) ^^| ^^[Why?](https://github.com/AUTplayed/imguralbumbot/blob/master/README.md) ^^| ^^[Creator](https://np.reddit.com/user/AUTplayed/) ^^| ^^[ignoreme](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=ignoreme&message=ignoreme) ^^| ^^[deletthis](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=imguralbumbot&subject=delet%20this&message=delet%20this%20e4eromw)
Lol apparently there's a tiny community of pit bull haters?
You know the afghan hound is a much more dangerous breed because of it's stupidity right? hate that dog atleast.
Just no.
And aggression doesn’t mean dangerousness.
Chihuahuas are aggressive but they aren’t dangerous.
Pit bulls are dangerous no matter they are aggressive or not
WHOA HOOO HOOO since this guy was 11?!?!
My GF is in vet medicine but nice try with your fun facts since i was 11. Relative intelligence is the only measurable factor on a dogs aggression look it up it will take you like 3 minutes.
> look it up
Shouldn’t you cite such a thing?
I’ve literally found 0 cases of afghan hounds killing people, 0 cases of them attacking people, and 0 cases of them just biting people.
Do you want me to tell ya how many pit bulls kill/attack and bite?
you know afghan hounds are in the middle east right lol, that's why you won't find western news articles about them.
My uncle who lives in the middle east for engineering work mostly in dubai says the dogs there that you find there are vicious animals in most cases, as house pet dogs are very uncommon in arab culture.
Searched in arab news and no report so far mentioned an afghan hound attack. I did find one of a man who abused one, and one about a dog show, but that’s it.
That argument is very weak against the fact that pit bulls are inherently dangerous...
Even if I completely disagreed with you, which I don't, this doesn't seem like a reason for a ban. Since when is having a different opinion a reason to completely shut someone off.
1: it's not a fact. The fact is they are not dangerous dogs whatsoever, it's assholes who make them that way.
2: saying something you know to be controversial just to get a response is being provocative. That's what you did, you know you fucking did it, stop playing the victim.
Not a fact?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00047723.htm
https://blog.dogsbite.org/2016/10/report-level-1-trauma-dog-bite-studies-pitbull-highest-prevalence.html
When every study says it's true, controversial is the wrong word. Correct would be the right word.
More people are bitten by then because more people mistreat them to make them more dangerous.
There is nothing about those dogs that makes them naturally more dangerous. Nothing at all. They're just fucking dogs. You're just too fucking stupid to get your head around that. Stop acting like a victim when you're not, that's not what this sub is for.
Relax, my man, getting angry with a guy on the internet over a disagreement is pointless, and the insult was uncalled for.
Pitbulls were bred for, amongst other things, fighting and self-defence. As such they had traits bred into them, which makes them more pre-disposed to aggression, and sometimes they don't know their own strength etc.
As a guy who has had/known several pitties and crosses, my opinion is that the pure-bred pitbulls are by far more "aggressive" than those cross-bred with something else.
They ***can*** be violent and aggressive, but by default, virtually no dog is going to attack you without good reason, such as being trained to do so, antagonised by unsuitable/threatening behaviour, or defending themselves.
No-one is talking about killing Pitbulls besides you, OP only said they are dangerous, which is true of any animal bred for fighting or that uses a mouth full of teeth as it's primary way of interacting with the world.
They are popular for dog fighting is all. That says nothing about how dangerous the breed is "inherently" at all.
Please stop repeating ridiculous, rabid, anti-pit-bull propaganda.
Still, even such blatant disinformation shouldn't be worth a ban.
You're just way, way off on this.
First of all, the CDC not only doesn't agree with you that pit bulls are disproportionately dangerous, it even helped author a document saying so: [A community approach to dog bite prevention](https://www.avma.org/public/Health/Documents/dogbite.pdf)
Listed in the contributors to the task force there is "Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, MPH ... representing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."
>When every study says it's true
This is just laughably inaccurate. Here's the American Veterinary Medical Association: [Dog Bite Risk and Prevention: The Role of Breed](https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/LiteratureReviews/Pages/The-Role-of-Breed-in-Dog-Bite-Risk-and-Prevention.aspx)
>Owners of pit bull-type dogs deal with a strong breed stigma, however controlled studies have not identified this breed group as disproportionately dangerous.
And Dogsbite, far from being a neutral public education website, is [just a pit bull hate site](https://ethicsalarms.com/2015/10/20/unethical-website-of-the-month-dogsbite-org/) run by a dog bite victim [with a vendetta](http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2010/03/the-truth-behind-dogsbiteorg.html).
And there are exactly zero credible, professional sources that support the idea that pit bulls are dangerous and should be banned. [All the expert sources say exactly the opposite.](https://www.reddit.com/r/AntiBSL/wiki/experts)
I've checked out the wiki page on [fatal dog attacks in the USA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States).
1. "Pit Bull": 622 results - yes, with a space. Pitbull is the rapper
2. "Rottweiler": 142 results
3. Any other breed has 20 or less attacks
Of course one should check how many of each breed of dog exists in the USA, but Pit Bulls are _so_ much number one that even number two is only 1/5^th its size.
Most Pit Bulls may not be dangerous, but I'll _definitely_ keep an eye one when I meet it.
Pitbulls are aggressive by their nature. They were bred to be that way and that's just how the breed is. Just like how hunting dogs and huskies are hyperactive and why golden retrievers/labradors are calm and good for families.
Yes not all pitbulls are aggressive often because those are mixed with other breeds. But it's not 100%. I have seen a few pitbull-lab litters and some are the sweetest dogs and some are assholes because of the mix. Have you never been around dogs?
Yep it's 100% not the dogs fault, but we fucked them up with inbreeding etc. I don't wish harm on any dog but not admitting they are dangerous is dangerous.
This is completely and totally false. They were actually originally bread to protect children.
That aside, the ban is uncalled for. They should have let this rediculous propaganda get debunked organically.
I don't think anyone should take breed advice from someone who spells "bred" as "bread". People need to understand that they are animals with instincts. Ignoring that is indeed dangerous. So are tigers not dangerous too because you believe it to be so?
55 comments
24 u/Terminal-Psychosis 18 Aug 2018 15:23
15 u/Doomtrack [OP] 18 Aug 2018 15:24
3 u/Endless_Summer 19 Aug 2018 12:33
1 u/Terminal-Psychosis 23 Aug 2018 05:29
19 u/Quality_Scrunt 18 Aug 2018 14:10
13 u/Thespud1979 * 18 Aug 2018 18:50
3 u/Sepherchorde 19 Aug 2018 00:11
1 u/Really18 19 Aug 2018 12:43
3 u/Sepherchorde * 20 Aug 2018 01:11
0 u/Really18 20 Aug 2018 12:47
2 u/Sepherchorde * 20 Aug 2018 20:49
1 u/Really18 21 Aug 2018 01:13
2 u/Sepherchorde 21 Aug 2018 02:16
1 u/Really18 21 Aug 2018 03:12
9 u/[deleted] * 18 Aug 2018 21:28
5 u/imguralbumbot 18 Aug 2018 13:51
1 u/Doomtrack [OP] † 18 Aug 2018 13:52
1 u/Doomtrack [OP] † 18 Aug 2018 14:11
2 u/imguralbumbot 18 Aug 2018 14:11
1 u/joedude † 18 Aug 2018 18:40
3 u/Really18 18 Aug 2018 23:31
2 u/joedude 19 Aug 2018 16:23
1 u/Really18 19 Aug 2018 16:50
2 u/joedude 19 Aug 2018 16:51
0 u/Really18 19 Aug 2018 17:04
1 u/joedude 19 Aug 2018 17:21
0 u/Really18 19 Aug 2018 17:46
2 u/joedude 19 Aug 2018 17:48
0 u/Really18 19 Aug 2018 20:28
1 u/Examiner7 14 Sep 2018 19:57
-2 u/billybobjoey † 19 Aug 2018 04:35
-3 u/MAGAParty 19 Aug 2018 09:37
3 u/loaneab2 19 Aug 2018 12:06
0 u/MAGAParty 19 Aug 2018 12:41
2 u/Really18 19 Aug 2018 12:45
3 u/loaneab2 19 Aug 2018 14:52
1 u/MAGAParty 19 Aug 2018 16:43
-13 u/KVirello 18 Aug 2018 14:42
10 u/Doomtrack [OP] 18 Aug 2018 14:54
-14 u/KVirello 18 Aug 2018 14:57
11 u/Doomtrack [OP] 18 Aug 2018 15:03
-11 u/KVirello 18 Aug 2018 15:05
10 u/Doomtrack [OP] 18 Aug 2018 15:06
-4 u/KVirello 18 Aug 2018 15:07
7 u/tyranosaurus_derp 18 Aug 2018 15:25
9 u/DutchmanDavid 18 Aug 2018 16:56
-6 u/Terminal-Psychosis 18 Aug 2018 15:28
3 u/RandomePerson 18 Aug 2018 21:05
-9 u/Terminal-Psychosis 18 Aug 2018 15:27
1 u/MadmanFinkelstein 19 Aug 2018 03:37
5 u/DutchmanDavid 18 Aug 2018 16:55
15 u/VerticalRadius 18 Aug 2018 15:06
11 u/Doomtrack [OP] 18 Aug 2018 15:12
-12 u/Terminal-Psychosis 18 Aug 2018 15:26
13 u/VerticalRadius 18 Aug 2018 15:40