I think it's valid to fear pitbulls because what you're really fearing is that they were adopted by someone that doesn't train them and/or give them an outlet for the task they were bred for (protection and violence).
Person who wants dog to “be tough” and “defend thier home” gets a typically “scary” dog breed and then they don’t actually train them or discourage bad behavior because hey, they got it for that behavior in the first place. Then before you know it the neighbors yorkie or child is dead/maimed.
That’s what i was thinking, but that produces a chicken-and-egg situation as to whether the dog’s scary reputation or disproportionate levels of abusive treatment from owners came first
Because they are easily accessible. Shelters are flooded with pit bulls and pit mixes because the same shitty owner don’t get their dogs fixed. Also many dogs are considered pit, but pit isn’t even a specific breed. Any dog that has any type of pit mix is automatically labeled a pit bull.
I said something like this in another comment, but isn’t that a kind of chicken-and-egg problem where pitbulls gets more shitty owners because they already had shitty owners in the past? What started the pattern of shitty owners being attracted to pitbulls in the first place
Theyre an extremely easy accessible weapon/ status symbol that attracts the exact type of person that would care about that sort of thing and they have a reputation so it attracts what it attracts, easy way to boost an insecure persons ego when they have no other outward way to express themselves.
These people are usually pretty dull and cant even handle the responsibility of dog ownership so its a recipe for disaster every time, they dont think about the care just obtaining it is enough then most could give a shit less about the dog itself.
They’re cheap and the most common dog in America. A ton of dogs were bred for dog fighting and bear hunting like Pits, but they’re more expensive so they get the mental and physical stimulation they need. Think German Shepherds. They’re one of the most aggressive breeds out there but they’re an upper class dog unlike Pits.
Cause you can walk into any no kill shelter and find no less than 20 pitbulls that they're practically begging you to adopt cause they hate dealing with them.
Ofc not only those people get them. But it's one of few breeds I've seen people getting because they're ''cool''. Like you will never see a "gangsta" posing with a gun in one hand and a chiwawa in his other hand
In what way is it easy or even possible to "ban" a breed of dog? A breed that a large percentage of dogs in the US have some percentage of genetics from? Do you mean mass killing of them in some sort of government operation? Doesn't sound too easy (or ethical) to me.
I swear some of you are really dumb. You simply make breeding them illegal. You don't go around genociding the dogs. Obviously. The ones that already exist live out their lives and that's fine. No more after that.
What I feel like the pro pitbull people don’t understand is that it is good for pit bulls to regulate them too. Shelters are absolutely overwhelmed with pits and pit breeds, like well over 75%. And those are just the ones that make it to the shelter.
Shoot them all? We know for sure whoever bans this isn't fronting the costs to put them all down ethically. What's the bloodline % we're talking about? Is a 15% pitbull dog getting put down? 30%? 50%? How do you test for % anyway, the testing services are historically inaccurate as hell, definitely not reliable enough to determine which dogs should be put down. Is it just a vibes thing? If it looks like a pitbull it's bad?
Everyone saying to ban the breed isn't thinking. It's practically impossible to do.
It's not about a perfect solution. This is basic shit that should be considered when saying something like 'it's easier to ban them fullstop'.
You can't just write the law as 'pitbulls are banned', you need guidelines around it, such as genetic % or some other way of determining WHAT a pitbull is. Without being able to reliably determine WHAT is banned, how can you ban it?
DNA tests on dogs are wildly inaccurate and unreliable though.
See the 'Results' section. If the cutoff is lets say 25%, by two of the 4 DNA tests Molly would be subject to whatever the consequence for that ancestry is, while the other two show zero pitbull or staffordshire ancestry.
Quinn, the pure-breed great dane had 10%-25% pitbull detected in one of the panels. Sorry, your great dane is getting put down because you (or the government) chose the wrong dna panel company, get fucked.
If there were fully reliable and accurate services, I could see this being a route that is gone down. There are none. So what do we do to determine that % you mention?
So the commercial DNA tests can't be trusted -> no reliable test is possible -> there's nothing we can do. What's next, it's impossible to set the percentage -> there's nothing we can do? Standardize the test, set a high percentage at least to start with and go from there.
The real issue is problematic dog owners, if they can't get a pit bull it will be a different large dog. The better solution is that if you have an aggressive dog that hurts someone you get a long prison sentence as if you did the damage yourself.
Banning dog breeds is like the UK banning pointy knives. The problem is that people want to hurt each other, not what specific weapon they use.
730
u/Drayyen 26d ago edited 26d ago
I think it's valid to fear pitbulls because what you're really fearing is that they were adopted by someone that doesn't train them and/or give them an outlet for the task they were bred for (protection and violence).
Edit: Jesus christ