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.

> ”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.

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.

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.