Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2022 20:09:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnson on Dec 2, 2022 21:44:31 GMT
I just want to say that I do not have anything against most breeds of dogs. However, I am also not against BSLs for any dangerous fighting breeds as long as it results in some form of safety ofr people. Also, when I said mixes, I meant in the sense that even a small hint of pitbull would ruin the labrador breed. Sort of like how a drip of Black could still ruin purely white paint. All the dogs fitting the umbrella breed are dangerous mixes that can attack anyone and anything without provocation. Pitbulls will follow their genetics, which is based on their history of dog fighting and high prey drive. This means even the 'good ones' can turn on dogs, humans and other animals without any provocation. At least BSLs have reduced the rates of dog bite injuries or mauling, especially with shitbulls.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2022 22:06:46 GMT
I just want to say that I do not have anything against most breeds of dogs. However, I am also not against BSLs for any dangerous fighting breeds as long as it results in some form of safety ofr people. Also, when I said mixes, I meant in the sense that even a small hint of pitbull would ruin the labrador breed. Sort of like how a drip of Black could still ruin purely white paint. All the dogs fitting the umbrella breed are dangerous mixes that can attack anyone and anything without provocation. Pitbulls will follow their genetics, which is based on their history of dog fighting and high prey drive. This means even the 'good ones' can turn on dogs, humans and other animals without any provocation. At least BSLs have reduced the rates of dog bite injuries or mauling, especially with shitbulls. No dog attacks without provocation, a human may fail to see the signs of an attack. I've seen dogs tense up before they're about to fight, I can feel it, to the average person the dogs just suddenly start fighting but nope, I can see and feel when it is going to happen. It's all down to owners knowing what they have. Owner error is always going to be the case, no matter the genetics of the dog. You could have the most dangerous individual dog straight from hell and it would only be dangerous if the owner didn't know what the hell they had and what they were doing. Is there any data to suggest BSL stops attacks? There are millions of dog bites each year, a small percentage due to pitbulls, but because pitbulls are so strong and their attack style is so damaging and their relentless attack it results in more serious injuries and deaths. Being a fighting dog is irrelevant, because fighting dogs are dog aggressive and the dogs that attack are never bred for fighting. The ones that are bred for fighting are notably quite friendly. What's the difference between fighting a boar or bull (Boarhounds/bulldogs) and fighting another dog (Bull terriers) besides bull terriers being dog aggressive? They CAN turn on other animals, sometimes, but they don't turn on humans because humans aren't their quarry. The Fila Brasileiro is a modern relative of the old slave hunting dogs and it shows many warnings, bites and human aggression. Prey drive isn't a problem, the dogs with the most prey drive are sighthounds and they're known for being friendly and calm. |
|
|
|
Post by lincoln on Dec 2, 2022 23:20:40 GMT
I just want to say that I do not have anything against most breeds of dogs. However, I am also not against BSLs for any dangerous fighting breeds as long as it results in some form of safety ofr people. Also, when I said mixes, I meant in the sense that even a small hint of pitbull would ruin the labrador breed. Sort of like how a drip of Black could still ruin purely white paint. All the dogs fitting the umbrella breed are dangerous mixes that can attack anyone and anything without provocation. Pitbulls will follow their genetics, which is based on their history of dog fighting and high prey drive. This means even the 'good ones' can turn on dogs, humans and other animals without any provocation. At least BSLs have reduced the rates of dog bite injuries or mauling, especially with shitbulls. At the place I work a lab bit someone in the face and it didn’t get reported. No one cares unless it’s a Pitbull looking dog. It rarely gets reported if it’s not a “Pitbull” looking dog, they just call it a dog attack. and again, those dogs you see attacking people are almost never legit A.P.B.Ts, I’ve never seen a legit A.P.B.T on the news those dogs you see attacking people are poorly bred as well A.P.B.Ts were bred to be animal aggressive, not human aggressive |
|
|
|
Post by Johnson on Dec 3, 2022 4:59:55 GMT
I just want to say that I do not have anything against most breeds of dogs. However, I am also not against BSLs for any dangerous fighting breeds as long as it results in some form of safety ofr people. Also, when I said mixes, I meant in the sense that even a small hint of pitbull would ruin the labrador breed. Sort of like how a drip of Black could still ruin purely white paint. All the dogs fitting the umbrella breed are dangerous mixes that can attack anyone and anything without provocation. Pitbulls will follow their genetics, which is based on their history of dog fighting and high prey drive. This means even the 'good ones' can turn on dogs, humans and other animals without any provocation. At least BSLs have reduced the rates of dog bite injuries or mauling, especially with shitbulls. No dog attacks without provocation, a human may fail to see the signs of an attack. I've seen dogs tense up before they're about to fight, I can feel it, to the average person the dogs just suddenly start fighting but nope, I can see and feel when it is going to happen. It's all down to owners knowing what they have. Owner error is always going to be the case, no matter the genetics of the dog. You could have the most dangerous individual dog straight from hell and it would only be dangerous if the owner didn't know what the hell they had and what they were doing. Is there any data to suggest BSL stops attacks? There are millions of dog bites each year, a small percentage due to pitbulls, but because pitbulls are so strong and their attack style is so damaging and their relentless attack it results in more serious injuries and deaths. Being a fighting dog is irrelevant, because fighting dogs are dog aggressive and the dogs that attack are never bred for fighting. The ones that are bred for fighting are notably quite friendly. What's the difference between fighting a boar or bull (Boarhounds/bulldogs) and fighting another dog (Bull terriers) besides bull terriers being dog aggressive? They CAN turn on other animals, sometimes, but they don't turn on humans because humans aren't their quarry. The Fila Brasileiro is a modern relative of the old slave hunting dogs and it shows many warnings, bites and human aggression. Prey drive isn't a problem, the dogs with the most prey drive are sighthounds and they're known for being friendly and calm. 1. 99% of the videos I have seen show a pitbull attacking an animal or person minding their own business. No other dog attacks for no reason, or at least as much as the pitbull. 2. While I do think there should be some action taken for the other fighting dogs, the main culprit is the pitbull. They cause more dog related fatalities than all the other breeds combined. It is funny since they only make up 6% of pets in the US, yet make up 60-65% of the fatal attacks by dogs. 3. There was a reduction in dog bites in Manitoba and Toronto with BSL. 4. High prey drive is why they kill young children. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2022 5:07:03 GMT
No dog attacks without provocation, a human may fail to see the signs of an attack. I've seen dogs tense up before they're about to fight, I can feel it, to the average person the dogs just suddenly start fighting but nope, I can see and feel when it is going to happen. It's all down to owners knowing what they have. Owner error is always going to be the case, no matter the genetics of the dog. You could have the most dangerous individual dog straight from hell and it would only be dangerous if the owner didn't know what the hell they had and what they were doing. Is there any data to suggest BSL stops attacks? There are millions of dog bites each year, a small percentage due to pitbulls, but because pitbulls are so strong and their attack style is so damaging and their relentless attack it results in more serious injuries and deaths. Being a fighting dog is irrelevant, because fighting dogs are dog aggressive and the dogs that attack are never bred for fighting. The ones that are bred for fighting are notably quite friendly. What's the difference between fighting a boar or bull (Boarhounds/bulldogs) and fighting another dog (Bull terriers) besides bull terriers being dog aggressive? They CAN turn on other animals, sometimes, but they don't turn on humans because humans aren't their quarry. The Fila Brasileiro is a modern relative of the old slave hunting dogs and it shows many warnings, bites and human aggression. Prey drive isn't a problem, the dogs with the most prey drive are sighthounds and they're known for being friendly and calm. 1. 99% of the videos I have seen show a pitbull attacking an animal or person minding their own business. No other dog attacks for no reason, or at least as much as the pitbull. 2. While I do think there should be some action taken for the other fighting dogs, the main culprit is the pitbull. They cause more dog related fatalities than all the other breeds combined. It is funny since they only make up 6% of pets in the US, yet make up 60-65% of the fatal attacks by dogs. 3. There was a reduction in dog bites in Manitoba and Toronto with BSL. 4. High prey drive is why they kill young children. Okay so it's territorial and loose. Why is it loose? The fact that they're loose to begin with suggests it's not the dog at fault, its owner is stupid. Yeah, fatal attacks, not bites. Fair. That is neither here nor there though because banning domestic animals is a retarded decision. The diminishing of bites perhaps has to do with misidentification confiscations thus the murder of unrelated dogs. Logically though there should be a reduction everywhere with BSL, 1 or 2 places having diminishing dog bites because of it doesn't exactly mean much. Any consistency in that? No it isn't, an unstable mind is why some dogs (not pitbulls specifically) kill children, or dogs that sense weakness such as huskies: virginiadogbitelawyer.com/huskies-linked-crib-snatching-infant-attacks/www.facebook.com/dogsbite.org/posts/why-do-we-sometimes-call-huskies-crib-snatchers-update-on-newborns-mauling-death/1431313126906563/Greyhounds get along great with children and if you put a greyhound in a field with rabbits, coyotes, foxes and deer you'll have a massacre on your hands. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnson on Dec 3, 2022 7:00:24 GMT
1. 99% of the videos I have seen show a pitbull attacking an animal or person minding their own business. No other dog attacks for no reason, or at least as much as the pitbull. 2. While I do think there should be some action taken for the other fighting dogs, the main culprit is the pitbull. They cause more dog related fatalities than all the other breeds combined. It is funny since they only make up 6% of pets in the US, yet make up 60-65% of the fatal attacks by dogs. 3. There was a reduction in dog bites in Manitoba and Toronto with BSL. 4. High prey drive is why they kill young children. Okay so it's territorial and loose. Why is it loose? The fact that they're loose to begin with suggests it's not the dog at fault, its owner is stupid. Yeah, fatal attacks, not bites. Fair. That is neither here nor there though because banning domestic animals is a retarded decision. The diminishing of bites perhaps has to do with misidentification confiscations thus the murder of unrelated dogs. Logically though there should be a reduction everywhere with BSL, 1 or 2 places having diminishing dog bites because of it doesn't exactly mean much. Any consistency in that? No it isn't, an unstable mind is why some dogs (not pitbulls specifically) kill children, or dogs that sense weakness such as huskies: virginiadogbitelawyer.com/huskies-linked-crib-snatching-infant-attacks/www.facebook.com/dogsbite.org/posts/why-do-we-sometimes-call-huskies-crib-snatchers-update-on-newborns-mauling-death/1431313126906563/Greyhounds get along great with children and if you put a greyhound in a field with rabbits, coyotes, foxes and deer you'll have a massacre on your hands. 1. Even the ones on leashes can still attack. They could have used a muzzle, but that seems more costly than just not owning this dangerous mutt. You are right the owner is stupid for not knowing shitbulls are dangerous breeds. They just believe the pitbull lobby lies of 'misunderstood' dogs like sheep. 2. Pitbulls are still most likely to bite. " Pit bulls were responsible for the highest percentage of reported bites across all the studies (22.5%), followed by mixed breeds (21.2%), and German shepherds (17.8%)." www.aaha.org/publications/newstat/articles/2019-06/new-study-identifies-most-damaging-dog-bites-by-breed/3. It is one step to reduce shitbull attacks. The other way would be euthanasia. I like the countries which outright banned shitbulls. They have no time for pit lover bullshit. 4. Good for Greyhounds. Shitbulls need to be as far away as possible from children. Nanny dogs of death!  |
|
|
|
Post by Hardcastle on Dec 3, 2022 7:06:04 GMT
I don't think they're more likely to attack than lots of dogs, no more likely to "snap" or lose their mind or attack for no reason or turn on someone or whatever, it's just that when they DO attack, it often becomes a statistic and a news story because they do a good job of it. They commit to the attack, hold their bite and are impervious to the physical assault onlookers subject them to trying to stop them, and people get hurt and charges are laid and the tv news truck shows up and etc etc.
I was bitten by lots of dogs growing up, it never made the news because they were fox terriers and shetland sheep dogs and corgis and etc etc. They just bit me and I said "ow!" and then I moseyed off mildly irritated and nothing came of it. If it was a pitbull... I would have had a problem, a dog attached to my arm holding on and shaking and people hitting it over the head with two-by-fours while it wouldn't let go. It would be a whole scene and a big to-do. That's what gets pitbulls in trouble. Not being prone to snapping for no reason, they are less prone than most, I feel. Not all, but a good chunk of dogs are more liable to snap and bite you long before a pitbull will.
The bigger issue though, is dog attacks in general are really not common. Annual aggravated assaults by human beings are %20600 more common than dog attacks. Homicides by humans are %49900 than fatal dog attacks. It's just actually a non-issue that is hyper-sensationalised by the media. Pitbulls have a bad reputation only because ALL dogs are so incredibly unlikely to kill a human, so that it seems like they kill a lot of people when compared to other dogs, even though they kill a very small number. Other dogs just kill an extraordinarily low number.
Cars are %91000 more likely to kill people than pitbulls, you're %63900 more likely to die by falling off something. Your powerpoints in your home are %600 more likely to kill you than a pitbull.
They just really aren't worth worrying about. They overwhelmingly live peacefully with humans and refrain from attacking us, frankly even when we deserve it. You could say they are actually saintly pacifists with the abuse they endure and don't fight back. The most glaring statistic of all is we kill %5 000 000 more pitbulls than the reverse per year.
|
|
|
|
Post by lincoln on Dec 3, 2022 8:10:30 GMT
Okay so it's territorial and loose. Why is it loose? The fact that they're loose to begin with suggests it's not the dog at fault, its owner is stupid. Yeah, fatal attacks, not bites. Fair. That is neither here nor there though because banning domestic animals is a retarded decision. The diminishing of bites perhaps has to do with misidentification confiscations thus the murder of unrelated dogs. Logically though there should be a reduction everywhere with BSL, 1 or 2 places having diminishing dog bites because of it doesn't exactly mean much. Any consistency in that? No it isn't, an unstable mind is why some dogs (not pitbulls specifically) kill children, or dogs that sense weakness such as huskies: virginiadogbitelawyer.com/huskies-linked-crib-snatching-infant-attacks/www.facebook.com/dogsbite.org/posts/why-do-we-sometimes-call-huskies-crib-snatchers-update-on-newborns-mauling-death/1431313126906563/Greyhounds get along great with children and if you put a greyhound in a field with rabbits, coyotes, foxes and deer you'll have a massacre on your hands. 1. Even the ones on leashes can still attack. They could have used a muzzle, but that seems more costly than just not owning this dangerous mutt. You are right the owner is stupid for not knowing shitbulls are dangerous breeds. They just believe the pitbull lobby lies of 'misunderstood' dogs like sheep. 2. Pitbulls are still most likely to bite. " Pit bulls were responsible for the highest percentage of reported bites across all the studies (22.5%), followed by mixed breeds (21.2%), and German shepherds (17.8%)." www.aaha.org/publications/newstat/articles/2019-06/new-study-identifies-most-damaging-dog-bites-by-breed/3. It is one step to reduce shitbull attacks. The other way would be euthanasia. I like the countries which outright banned shitbulls. They have no time for pit lover bullshit. 4. Good for Greyhounds. Shitbulls need to be as far away as possible from children. Nanny dogs of death! You know why there are so many “Pitbull” attacks? Because people don’t know what a legit A.P.B.T is i recommend learning what a A.P.B.T is before you speak on them |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2022 12:06:11 GMT
Okay so it's territorial and loose. Why is it loose? The fact that they're loose to begin with suggests it's not the dog at fault, its owner is stupid. Yeah, fatal attacks, not bites. Fair. That is neither here nor there though because banning domestic animals is a retarded decision. The diminishing of bites perhaps has to do with misidentification confiscations thus the murder of unrelated dogs. Logically though there should be a reduction everywhere with BSL, 1 or 2 places having diminishing dog bites because of it doesn't exactly mean much. Any consistency in that? No it isn't, an unstable mind is why some dogs (not pitbulls specifically) kill children, or dogs that sense weakness such as huskies: virginiadogbitelawyer.com/huskies-linked-crib-snatching-infant-attacks/www.facebook.com/dogsbite.org/posts/why-do-we-sometimes-call-huskies-crib-snatchers-update-on-newborns-mauling-death/1431313126906563/Greyhounds get along great with children and if you put a greyhound in a field with rabbits, coyotes, foxes and deer you'll have a massacre on your hands. 1. Even the ones on leashes can still attack. They could have used a muzzle, but that seems more costly than just not owning this dangerous mutt. You are right the owner is stupid for not knowing shitbulls are dangerous breeds. They just believe the pitbull lobby lies of 'misunderstood' dogs like sheep. 2. Pitbulls are still most likely to bite. " Pit bulls were responsible for the highest percentage of reported bites across all the studies (22.5%), followed by mixed breeds (21.2%), and German shepherds (17.8%)." www.aaha.org/publications/newstat/articles/2019-06/new-study-identifies-most-damaging-dog-bites-by-breed/3. It is one step to reduce shitbull attacks. The other way would be euthanasia. I like the countries which outright banned shitbulls. They have no time for pit lover bullshit. 4. Good for Greyhounds. Shitbulls need to be as far away as possible from children. Nanny dogs of death! Do you have personal experience like me? Otherwise running your mouth won't help.  |
|
|
|
Post by Johnson on Dec 3, 2022 20:20:24 GMT
1. Even the ones on leashes can still attack. They could have used a muzzle, but that seems more costly than just not owning this dangerous mutt. You are right the owner is stupid for not knowing shitbulls are dangerous breeds. They just believe the pitbull lobby lies of 'misunderstood' dogs like sheep. 2. Pitbulls are still most likely to bite. " Pit bulls were responsible for the highest percentage of reported bites across all the studies (22.5%), followed by mixed breeds (21.2%), and German shepherds (17.8%)." www.aaha.org/publications/newstat/articles/2019-06/new-study-identifies-most-damaging-dog-bites-by-breed/3. It is one step to reduce shitbull attacks. The other way would be euthanasia. I like the countries which outright banned shitbulls. They have no time for pit lover bullshit. 4. Good for Greyhounds. Shitbulls need to be as far away as possible from children. Nanny dogs of death! You know why there are so many “Pitbull” attacks? Because people don’t know what a legit A.P.B.T is i recommend learning what a A.P.B.T is before you speak on them They have no problem distinguishing between pitbulls and their mixes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2022 20:33:22 GMT
You know why there are so many “Pitbull” attacks? Because people don’t know what a legit A.P.B.T is i recommend learning what a A.P.B.T is before you speak on them They have no problem distinguishing between pitbulls and their mixes. Evidently they do. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnson on Dec 3, 2022 20:51:49 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2022 23:32:33 GMT
So they took dogs that have an instinct to grab things by the face, and only recorded instances of facial bites. That'll yield results, sure. This: ''The same goes for dogs with wide and short heads weighing between 66 and 100 pounds.'' puts a bullet hole in their study though. Not that it's relevant, because there are a very tiny amount of attacks anyways. Nobody gives a shit about dog attacks besides idiots who can't do research and use logic. |
|
|
|
Post by lincoln on Dec 3, 2022 23:44:13 GMT
You know why there are so many “Pitbull” attacks? Because people don’t know what a legit A.P.B.T is i recommend learning what a A.P.B.T is before you speak on them They have no problem distinguishing between pitbulls and their mixes. Then why don’t they do it? |
|
