Are pit bulls inherently dangerous? Maryland Court ruled yes -.-

[Chun Liroy]

Everyone's arguments are along the lines of, "You have to train/breed them right." Which is of course true, but you know what you don't have to say that for? Most other dogs. Most dogs don't require special training outside of normal attention in order to be safe for families. If you make the statement that Pit Bulls are fine if you give them special training then you are conceding the point that they are inherently more dangerous than dogs that do not require this training.

Actually, on the very last page I said that they don't need special training like many suggest. The reason is because most of the other breeds were bred right, so you pretty much just answered your own question. Try again. Does a pitbull that has a pedigree associated with dog fighting need a little bit extra to be less aggressive? Certainly. The breed as a whole, definitely not.

[Chun Liroy]

Again statistically speaking the MAJORITY of pitbulls by a VERY LARGE MARGIN are not violent and never attack a human being. So please keep grasping at straws and saying that the average dog owner shouldn't own them because 0.033% of them are dangerous.

Pitbulls are not inherently aggressive towards people at all and were specifically bred not to be. Without any training they will remain non-aggressive towards people, you have to go out of your way to specifically train them to be aggressive towards people.

But statistics!

[Tweek]

Everyone's arguments are along the lines of, "You have to train/breed them right." Which is of course true, but you know what you don't have to say that for? Most other dogs. Most dogs don't require special training outside of normal attention in order to be safe for families. If you make the statement that Pit Bulls are fine if you give them special training then you are conceding the point that they are inherently more dangerous than dogs that do not require this training.

nah that's not what we're saying. leave any dog to fend for himself from birth in the wild and it will be vicious as fuck to humans. pit bulls DO NOT require extra special super attention did you even read the thread? they require the normal amount of attention from a responsible owner that isn't doing dumb ass shit it's actually easier with a pit than most other dogs they don't require more attention.. yes some breeds do especially a guard dog. If the question is about what we listed earlier (improperly bred pit bulls, mistreated pit bulls, pit bulls bred specifically to fight, pit bulls that have been isolated or neglected) then yes those pit bulls do require special attention and special training but your average fucking pit bull from the pound does not.

[miokomioko]

Pitbulls are not inherently aggressive towards people at all and were specifically bred not to be. Without any training they will remain non-aggressive towards people, you have to go out of your way to specifically train them to be aggressive towards people.

My very original statement on this topic admitted that they were not particularly dangerous to humans, mostly other dogs. However, children and infants being small, often dog-sized, living creatures, can put them at very high risk with a dog that normally only attacks other dogs. Thus, I consider them inherently dangerous to dogs and children (who are humans).

[Dantrag]

Everyone's arguments are along the lines of, "You have to train/breed them right." Which is of course true, but you know what you don't have to say that for? Most other dogs. Most dogs don't require special training outside of normal attention in order to be safe for families. If you make the statement that Pit Bulls are fine if you give them special training then you are conceding the point that they are inherently more dangerous than dogs that do not require this training.

Golden retrievers are one of the top bite dogs now due to improper breeding.

[miokomioko]

Golden retrievers are one of the top bite dogs now due to improper breeding.

Yeah, disregard the skewed numbers from being one of the most common dogs in the country.

[Chun Liroy]

Why aren't golden retrievers put down after they bite someone?

[Dimmauk]

It's ok for golden retrievers to bite, they are white.

[Dantrag]

Yeah, disregard the skewed numbers from being one of the most common dogs in the country.

And due to being popular it opened them up for mass breeding, puppy mills and messed up genetics.

[Jefe]

tell us more about stuff that happens in Mexico that no one gives a fuck about please

Apparently you can't read because the animals I mentioned (fighting bull and gamecock) were bred for the same reasons, you imbecile. A holstein (that's milk cow for you, asswipe) is not going to gore my ass as a Lidia would. Both are the same height, weight, etc. etc. but the level of aggressiveness/behaviour are complete opposites.

[zoobernut]

My very original statement on this topic admitted that they were not particularly dangerous to humans, mostly other dogs. However, children and infants being small, often dog-sized, living creatures, can put them at very high risk with a dog that normally only attacks other dogs. Thus, I consider them inherently dangerous to dogs and children (who are humans).

ALL dogs are inherently dangerous to children it is stupid to use that as a tool in this discussion and it really has no relevance. And dog aggression can show up in ANY breed of dog, specially if you don't socialize your dog with other dogs.

Yeah, disregard the skewed numbers from being one of the most common dogs in the country.

That is hilarious you say that because pitbulls are also one of the most common dogs in the country as well. They have been gaining in popularity massively. (They were also the #1 most popular dog in america at the turn of the century)

Oh and another interesting point that makes dog bite statistics useless. While all the dog bite statistics for other breeds are kept specific to that breed, the pitbull category is used as a dumping ground for any mutt that is a pitbull mix or even has pitbull looking characteristics. That makes it somewhat biased don't you think?

Specially when you consider boxer mixes amongst other mixes can look very much like a pitbull without having any pitbull in them.

[miokomioko]

Sigh.

I am baffled at why people in this thread can't grasp the fact that temperament is something that living creatures can be (and always have been) bred for.

[Chun Liroy]

I am still baffled why you think that this subset of pitbulls bred for bad temperament is not in the vast minority

[Chun Liroy]

Also, Zoobernut's post had nothing to do with that.

[miokomioko]

I'm out of this retard circus. Enjoy living under a rock with your friendly pit, apparently living, undeniable proof that the breed is no more of a risk to anyone or anything than a kitchen sponge.

[Chun Liroy]

I'm out of this retard circus. Enjoy living under a rock with your friendly pit, apparently living, undeniable proof that the breed is no more of a risk to anyone or anything than a kitchen sponge.

Enjoy completely and utterly missing the point. Hope you get attacked by your labrador retriever.

[miokomioko]

Hope you get attacked by your labrador retriever.

Unlikely.

[zoobernut]

Unlikely.

Why because you trained it and socialized it properly?

[Tweek]

Of the 78 million dogs in the US I believe there is an estimated 10 million or so classified as pit bull. 1 in every 8 dog in the US. Just take 1 fucking minute to process that.

[Dimmauk]

Fyi, American dogs are more violent than European dogs, but American dogs have better teeth.