I don't disagree with you but asking to get your view changed in a community whose entire purpose is to have the same view might not be very productive.
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
-12 points (43.3% liked)
Ban PitBulls
109 readers
51 users here now
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.
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
It works fine. The vast majority of people who will see the post are not community members.
Agreed, it’s not surprising a dog breed raised for dog fighting is dangerous.
When pit bulls get banned, owners just switch to some other breed and that one becomes the new highest recorded dog attacks.
In fact often banning pit bulls makes dog attacks go up, not down.
Owners that raise dogs to attack others choose pitbulls specifically often.
Banning pitbulls has never been shown to have any impact on rates of dog attacks anytime it was done.
The numbers simply just can't be argued with, it's been tried multiple times by various cities, it doesn't fix anything because it has nothing to do with the species and everything to do with the owners.
Can you cite the sources for your claim that an outright ban shifts the numbers to a different breed?
No. He cant. Because there is no such study.
You seem to be implying bans would be futile if the intention is to reduce attacks because other breeds will simply start attacking more. Am I misunderstanding your assumptions? That sounds like a bizarre position to take.
The other breeds are still much safer. I trust a rottweiler more than a pit bull, their rate of bites is much lower.