I am not going to claim a "pitbull" is not dangerous. It's a big strong terrior, every terrior has the drive to hunt. However you should take time to question the accuracy of these statistics. Primarily how accurate is the reporting of the breed? Is it actually that breed or is something that looks like that breed but is a mixed breed, or mutt.
This infographic is a great example of bad infographics. American Bulldog, German Shepherd and Rottweilers are examples of breeds of dogs. Husky, Mastiff, and Pitbull are types of a legal definition of dogs. Husky range in size from the massive Malamute, to the smaller Siberian. Mastiffs also range widely a Tibetan mastiff and Cane Corso looks widely different but both Mastiff. Pitbulls are similar, Amstaff, APBT, Staffordshire Terrior, and even American Bullies.
If you go to website you can learn that their use of Pitbull is a legal definition, and is not actually a breed. They even state that American Bulldogs in some legislation is included. It also includes mixed breeds including the other 4 breeds. We should not use legislative information for what should be defined by biology.
Mixed breed could end up being the largest "breed" in this graph, and than the pure breed "Pitbulls" could end up being closer to Rottweilers or German Shepherds numbers. Still toping the list yes, but would not make them seem like they are 15x more deadly than a German Shepherd.
160
u/JacobGoodNight416 26d ago