Ban PitBulls
Dog bite severity varies by the breed of dog, and studies have found that pit bull–type dogs have both a high rate of reported bites and a high rate of severe injuries, compared to other non–pit bull–type dogs.
Pit bull–type dogs are extensively used in the United States for dogfighting, a practice that has continued despite being outlawed. Several nations and jurisdictions restrict the ownership of pit bull–type dogs through breed-specific legislation.
Rules:
-
Keep it civil.
-
No advocating for violence.
-
The sole goal for this comm is to ban pit bulls from every jurisdiction and to treat the remaining ones with respect while every caretaker follows the required safety precautions to keep everyone safe. Dog breeds with documented health issues should also be stopped from being forcibly bred into this world.
-
No pit bull advocate gaslighting. Though good faith debates are allowed.
Links:
Dogsbite.org is routinely slandered by the pro-pit lobby, but the site is informative and its data collection procedures are transparent and well-documented.
Pit Nutter Bingo Cliched excuses and problematic arguments pit nutters use.
view the rest of the comments
This statement is a gross denial of the influence of genetics on behavior. A fox hunts because it’s partially hardwired to sate its omnivorous diet with small vertebrates. As does a snake, with no teaching influences from a parental figure.
Similarly, a short hair pointer dog points, not purely because it is taught.
Pitbulls were bred as fighting dogs in England from the 19th century onward. There’s a reason they have stocky bodies, frog mouths, and short fur.
Then you also have to consider the genetic background of breeds like German shepherds and Dobermann which were both bred as guard dogs. They have an instinct to protect their owner and attack strangers. Should they also be banned?
I mean their rates of attacks are much lower than the pitbulls.
Source
Both german shepherds and dobermanns dont even make up half the attacks pitbulls cause.
Conclusion from that same (25 year old) study:
Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog's breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites.These difficulties are easily addressed by genetic testing of dog breeds that’s commonplace today, but that requires forcing genetic testing of dogs that have attacked people, which I don’t believe is law anywhere at the moment.
Purposefully obscuring breed type is scientific malpractice, and often encouraged in forums on pitbull type dogs e.g. r/pitbulls. If you pay attention to this discourse, you will know there’s an intent to obscure these statistics.
CDC stats seem to be only general and one page of this 28 page report issue: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/72/wr/pdfs/mm7236-H.pdf
More recent work generally supports this old data:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/09/13/americas-most-dangerous-dog-breeds-infographic/
https://www.palermolawgroup.com/blog/what-percentage-of-dog-attacks-are-pit-bulls?hs_amp=true
https://www.dogbitelaw.com/vicious-dogs-and-dangerous-dogs/pit-bulls-facts-and-figures/