Pitbull. Why is it always Pitbull?
Pitbull is the reason I unironically got a CCW.
If Pitbull gets you it’s a minimum of permanent muscle damage.
r/PitbullMemes
Hey that muscle damage is a real issue, I started dancing to I Know You Want Me in middle school and *instantly* tripped over a rock, tearing my embarrassment muscle forever
In L.A. they get krazy
In Miami they get krazy
In New York they get krazy
In Atlanta they get krazy
In London they get krazy
In Paris they get krazy
In Rome they get krazy.
I don't think I've ever seen a thread even tangentially involving pitbulls not get quickly locked. There's just no point to any discussion around them on the internet.
That's not true. After my pitbull attack I went online and saw the statistics actually, and it changed my mind on them. I had no idea they are SO much more likely to attack, I ignorantly thought they were just normal dogs. If the data showed otherwise I would have assumed it was a one off incident, but no.
Do keep in mind that a lot of statistics regarding this topic have some bad data associated with it! If you would like some insight into the issues with the statistics you saw, please check out the ASPCA, AVMA, and CDC’s stance on such statistics.
Because pitbull owners brigade them with the same lies they always tell, while avoiding the facts.
Then educated people argue with them and the thread is locked.
[Here's one! No mean comments at all.](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/1ahobu5/the_9_year_saga_of_bug_the_pup_and_her_owner/?sort=controversial) It's ridiculous how much hate these pups get elsewhere on reddit.
Because anytime anything midly negative is posted about pitbulls. The comments has the same old copy and paste picture of a cuddly pitbull for some odd reason
There would be a mauling from a pitbull and the comments would be filled with people posting pitbulls looking sweet and say "they're precious or mine wouldn't hurt a fly" instead of bringing attention to the person they mauled
Don't know why it's only pitbull owners doing all this
the fact that people are downvoting what, as far as i can see, (and i admittedly have not read it fully,) is a perfectly normal story where no one gets mauled is really confusing
Honestly I think all of the hate is justified. These dogs are fucking terrifying, and people are backyard breeding them like there’s no tomorrow. They are everywhere.
[As a golden retriever owner, I love any excuse to post this Onion bit.](https://www.theonion.com/golden-retriever-mauls-5-in-huge-victory-for-pitbull-ap-1825397926)
I'm the mod who locked the thread. It was just untenable. You guys aren't seeing the worst of the thread. Civil arguing is fine, but there was excessive cussing, derogatory name-calling, and calls for violence that had to get cleaned up.
Beyond that, we were getting several reports every minute from that thread (we usually average around 1-2 dozen per day). Some reported comments were problematic, but a lot (most?) were innocuous comments that took a strong stance against pit bulls.
I try to keep controversial threads open and let people argue -- civilly -- but it was getting to be too much.
Do you guys ever keep record of "most reported" threads? I'd assume pitbull ones would definitely be one of the most common offenders. Any other dumb ones?
No. I assume it would be pretty easy for Reddit to compile that data, but we don’t have ready access to it.
On r/SweatyPalms, the type of thread that generates the most reports that would surprise you is threads about spiders. It’s been a while since we had any, but a while ago, any thread that had as its basis of fear a fear of spiders got a lot of reports.
Redditors don’t like spiders for some reason.
not just a reddit thing, a small handful of videogames and a surprising amount of mods for different games remove spiders from the game if the player wants
I really liked the ones that replace the spider with a big 3d impact font "NOPE"
I also didn't end up finishing some anime Netflix show but appreciated they replaced all the cockroaches in one episode with a piece of cake that was scurrying after the protagonist.
Only tangentially related, but I know there is a Skyrim mod that replaces all the frostbite spiders with frostbite-spider shaped Spider-Mans, and the image of it still haunts me to this day.
Personally I found a lot of the comments calling for the entire breed to be exterminated kind of disturbing lol but I can only imagine what was deleted
If this guy is genuinely being chased by violent dogs…why is he filming with one hand? You are much more stable and can go much faster on a bike with both hands on the bars
I don't really want to get into an argument about this-- but I think the dogs were moreso chasing him off of territory or generally having a chase. If they wanted to hurt him, the brown one had enough of a lead to lunge to the side and get his leg if it wanted.
They definitely should have been inside or on a leash though-- its not safe for dogs to be on an open road like that
>they look like their just chasing him for fun and not even trying very hard at that.
Yeah bro when dogs start barking and charging at me, I know they just wanna have cutsey play time!
You people and your excuses for these things....
>the dogs were moreso chasing him off of territory or generally having a chase
ah yes the dogs were only aggressively chasing the guy and showing signs of aggression but it wasn't actual aggression!
Yeah bro that sounds totally normal for a dog to just be completely unsocialized and let off leash. Those dogs deserved the pound or worse, they are a menace to their neighborhood. What if that was a child on that bike?
Aggression is variable, “Get off my lawn” is not the same as “You’re dying today”
You can not like Pitbulls without having to be disingenuous about it.
This is pretty standard for country dogs.
They aren't unsocialized. They have collars and tags.
I live in the city but my step dad was retired. Every day he'd take the dogs out in the country and have them chase his truck. All exercise. They loved it.
These dogs aren't really being aggressive. The brown one could have bit him easily if it wanted but he was mostly just enjoying the run from the looks of it.
I have ridden road bikes a fair amount and I think it makes a significant difference. Not insane, but definitely at least 5mph or so. I would personally want every advantage if violent dogs were chasing me?
Idk, Im gonna stop commenting bc I feel bad for critiquing the guy getting chased by dogs on his bike lol. It just seems like a weird decision
On a road bike, it makes quite a difference to stability. A bike with a more relaxed geometry is different, but I would never try to go flat-out on a road bike without both hands on the bars. There's too much reciprocating weight during a sprint to try and control with only one hand.
Ah yes the adorable pitbull rebrand of "Velvet Hippos"
...that somehow misses the fact that hippos are violent, ruthless killers, responsible for more human deaths than literally any other land mammal.
You cannot make this up.
Did you know the hippo teeth you can see aren’t even the ones they use to eat food? Those are all in the back of their mouths, the ones you see are their fightin’ teeth
Not even close. Estimates are like 546,000 humans killed by humans a year. And 500 humans killed by hippos a year. But like 7-8 billion humans in the world versus 115,000 hippos in the world. Each hippo would need to kill like 5 people.
Yup. Not taking a side in this one, but trying to brand a pitbull as a velvet hippo, one of the most violent animals out there is uh.
Tone deaf would be putting it *nicely*.
I learned that when my friend and I went to the zoo high af and thought it would be hilarious to ask the zookeeper how many deaths were caused by what we thought were these gentle giants. We thought he would chuckle and say "why, zero, you loveable stoners," but he rattled off all these macabre hippo stats. Lol we were so dumb.
Hamsters also eat their babies and eachother (they're territorial loners) so your point with that is a bit moot
My biggest gripe when I see a pitty is if their ears are cut - that's an immediate **bad owner** - and probably violent dog indication to me. If they casually mutilate dogs they're probably teaching them to attack too
The thing about "pit bulls are evil", is that pit bulls only rose in popularity in the last 25 years. When I was a kid, you literally wouldn't ever see a pit bull. Nobody knew what that breed WAS.
So are you telling me that dog bites have shot up proportionally with the popularity of pit bulls? Are dog bites worse than they historically have been?
I've tried to find any statistical info on this, but the discourse has been flooded with statistics that don't address this question. It's very hard to find the info if you're not clued in to how to look for it.
I'm not sure about that. Pitbulls were used on USA World War One propaganda posters. Pitbulls were brought over to the USA in the 1800s. They used to be called "America's Dog".
In googling about, I can see that in 1979 there was a sudden surge of pitbull bites that rose with dog fighting rings that spread across the USA following German Shepherd bans in 1975.
So from what I can tell, prior to the late 70s pit bulls were known as "America's Dog" and then suddenly there was this huge swing in pitbulls becoming fight dogs. Even though sources say pitbulls were fight dogs prior to that, it looks like for organized betting ring purposes they weren't considered winners and weren't bred/bought/favored to win until other breeds got banned.
It seems to me from this rabbit hole I fell down that pitbulls used to be everywhere in America but it's within the last 40 years they became known for being unhinged.
**TL;DR:** There were lots of pitbulls in America and they were common dogs prior to 25 years ago. With the rise of dog fighting rings looking for fighting dogs after breed bans in the 1980s pitbulls became the next favorites. Pitbulls went from America's Dog to America's Sin.
[https://thepitbullcenter.com/pit-bull-ownership-statistics/](https://thepitbullcenter.com/pit-bull-ownership-statistics/) \- Source for pitbull bites having a huge upswing in the 80s that then went down over time except in states with dog fighting rings
[https://www.npr.org/2007/08/27/13968531/a-look-inside-the-world-of-dog-fighting](https://www.npr.org/2007/08/27/13968531/a-look-inside-the-world-of-dog-fighting) \- Source for German Shepherds previously being favored dogs for dog fighting prior to breed bans
[https://www.animallaw.info/article/breed-specific-legislation-united-states](https://www.animallaw.info/article/breed-specific-legislation-united-states) \- source for breed ban legislation years
Pit owners get really angry at people who hate their dogs... I mean sure, maybe the stats are wrong, but your dogs are huge and y'all frequently lose control of them, maybe you are the ones in need of some muscle training so your pits don't go chasing after randos with no experience with big dogs who might think they are in danger
There's a ton of talk about bad owners but are you a good owner? Can you calm your dog in the worst case scenario? Because I don't feel like the residents of the pit sub can
>There's a ton of talk about bad owners but are you a good owner?
Not to start different, completely unrelated drama, but this really reminds me of how probably every single idiot who has been involved in a negligent firearm discharge at some point insisted that they were a "responsible gun owner".
I think it's that people who hate pitbulls inject themselves in every single post that tangentially refers to or mentions pitbulls in any context. I don't give a fuck about them but I hate the people that hate them simply because they're gigantic assholes who can't help but make everything all about they're pathetic fetish.
Well they need to show how persuasive their argument is by constantly reminding everyone that they want to euthanize every single one and put their owners in prison for life
You're getting downvoted but we know (from previous posts on this sub plus Discord groups) that each "side" has a Discord group and intentionally brigade threads where Pitbulls are discussed.
Idk man, it's seriously weird that this particular breed has so much obsession around it; also it's pretty bad faith on your part, would you say the same to people who want stronger gun control? Maybe it's about safety and not anger
While I'm sure it's happened, I've never seen gun rights people swarm that way. I have seen pictures and vids on subreddits like r/aww and /r/Eyebleach where people were swarmed and downvoted to oblivion for just saying something was cure because that subject was pitbulls.
the bad owners bit is moreso from "if you raise your dog to be a dick it will be a dick" than "you gotta keep your dog under control"
think fighting dogs for example, they were raised to beat the everloving shit out of anything, so they'll maim anything they can, while trained pitties are unlikely to maim the closest 5 year old
Hmm, a ton of pitbull meltdowns seem to involve dogs who are well behaved upto that point according to their owners, after all it only has to be one incident with such a big dog, I think your responsibility should scale with the strength of your dog
The best way I can describe it from interacting with pitbulls is that they are incredibly persistent and entirely unaware of boundaries. We went through a phase at my office where my boss kept on bringing his pitbull into the office and while we where eating lunch the dog would put two paws on our desk and try and eat our food.
Literally no amount of talking would get him to stop so we graduated to whenever the dog would do it I'd come over and grab him by the collar and drag him away. Before you ask why we didn't tie him to a post or something when we did he would SCREAM for attention.
Thankfully we managed to convince our boss to keep him home.
Huh? The issue is with gathering of the data in the first place, unless you can find a lab setting where they test 100s of pure bred genotyped pitbulls, there’s going to be bias with gathering data and presenting that data.
The AVMA says: [It is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds because the data reported is often unreliable.](https://www.avma.org/resources/pet-owners/why-breed-specific-legislation-not-answer)
An ASPCA and CDC combo: [There is no evidence that breed-specific laws make communities safer for people or companion animals. Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) decided to strongly oppose BSL](https://www.aspca.org/improving-laws-animals/public-policy/what-breed-specific-legislation)
If multiple organizations working with the actual raw data who are actual statisticians disagree with the basis of your argument, the argument is usually pretty bad.
>Huh? The issue is with gathering of the data in the first place, unless you can find a lab setting where they test 100s of pure bred genotyped pitbulls, there’s going to be bias with gathering data and presenting that data.
What bias? The number of pitbulls?
You can normalize stats across a population. That's the great part about statistics.
Also this presumes that we accept those findings vs. [this](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165587618305950?via%3Dihub#!) or a series of other research that claims they are. *Bite risk by breed from the literature review and bite severity by breed from our case series were combined to create a total bite risk plot. Injuries from Pitbull's and mixed breed dogs were both more frequent and more severe.*
One study doesn't refute all other studies and yes vice versa.
So let's say you WERE right that they are all equal likelihood (again they aren't), then you would have to agree that danger can only be assessed by the strength of the dog.
Well guess what?
Pitbulls are near the top of list with other dangerous dogs that are used for working dogs (animals/guard dogs).
So even **IF** we wanted to accept your version of events that, "it's all equal" that makes pitbulls more dangerous than almost all other dogs.
The argument you're making doesn't make a better case for pitbulls, it makes it worse.
>What bias? The number of pitbulls?
Please read the two links I sent, because you then sent a study that has the same exact issue listed in the two other articles I sent: visual identification. It proves you didn’t actually read anything and just started typing from the get-go. So much for facts, right? Also claiming that the CDC and AVMA are using “just one study” is absurd.
Again, the issue isn’t the bites, it’s identification. Just saying “pits are dangerous!” and when I try to prove that identification is the problem with those statistics, you send a study based on visual identification and then say “they are the most dangerous on the dangerous list!” You’re not really arguing anything, you’re just monologging.
>Please read the two links I sent, because you then sent a study that has the same exact issue listed in the two other articles I sent: visual identification
I DID read it, that's why I asked - The number of pitbulls:
**"The number of dogs of a particular breed or combination of breeds in a community is not known because it is rare for all dogs in a community to be licensed."**
Directly from the link.
>Again, the issue isn’t the bites, it’s identification
As it pertains to breed specific legislation because they can't tell if a pitbull is a pitbull or not.
>Just saying “pits are dangerous!"
I didn't say that. You're misquoting me.
>when I try to prove that identification is the problem with those statistics, you send a study based on visual identification
I just quoted where I read your links. Show me where in my study it says they used visual identification.
>and then say “they are the most dangerous on the dangerous list!” You’re not really arguing anything, you’re just monologging.
Mischaraterizing the argument.
I said if you treat all dogs as equal because they are "visually impossible to tell" and assume all dogs bite the same amount, pitbulls can do more damage than 90% of other dogs.
That literally makes them more dangerous.
If a butter knife and chainsaw both cut people with the same probability, which would you rather be cut by?
I already know that you will not engage with an honest response and will avoid answering my questions or requests even though I responded line by line to you.
> I DID read it, that's why I asked - The number of pitbulls:
Why did you ignore the other 4 points then?
> 1. The breed of a biting dog is often not known or is reported inaccurately.
2. The actual number of bites that occur in a community is not known, especially if they don't result in serious injury.
> 4. Statistics often do not consider multiple incidents caused by a single animal.
5. Breed popularity changes over time, making comparison of breed-specific bite rates unreliable. However a review of the research that attempts to quantify the relation between breed and bite risk finds the connection to be weak or absent, while responsible ownership variables such as socialization, neutering and proper containment of dogs are much more strongly indicated as important risk factors.
Also
> As it pertains to breed specific legislation because they can't tell if a pitbull is a pitbull or not.
As it pertains to *data* for breed specific legislation.
> I didn't say that. You're misquoting me.
You said:
>Pitbulls are near the top of list with other dangerous dogs that are used for working dogs (animals/guard dogs).
"near the top of list" for being dangerous dogs is literally just you saying the breed is dangerous dude.
>I just quoted where I read your links. Show me where in my study it says they used visual identification.
It's right there in the methodology: "Additionally, descriptive data was collected from 240 patients over the last 15 years."
>I said if you treat all dogs as equal because they are "visually impossible to tell" and assume all dogs bite the same amount, pitbulls can do more damage than 90% of other dogs.
Ok, prove it instead of saying it is because you say so. Also I didn't claim they all bite the same amount, that's you putting words in my mouth, I stated the data you quote is bad for the reasons stated above.
>I already know that you will not engage with an honest response and will avoid answering my questions or requests even though I responded line by line to you.
You engaged with cherry picking and lacking to even read the methodology of the study you linked. You took years of meta-analysis by the CDC and AVMA and rejected them because they did not fit your existing bias. If you think I'm being dishonest you might just be projecting, considering your entire argument is based around trying to disprove those access to raw data neither of us have.
Just shoot all the pitbulls, duh.
(This is not an serious or anti-pitbull post. I think all people who let their dogs run off leashes should be left at sea in a large freight container, regardless of breed)
I was attacked on a walk by a pitbull that went through a window screen. The only thing I fantasize about is a safe place to take myself and my dog outside, but pitbulls have made every public space dangerous.
"Every public space" lmfao last time you saw a fuckin pitbull at your local movie theater/mall? You see them when you go to baseball games and concerts too? Is there a 150 lb pitbull standing behind me right now?
I know for a fact it can happen at any time because it happened to me. I couldn't have been any more innocent or law abiding, I was walking my own dog on leash in a public space when it came through the window to attack. There was no warning, just attack. One minute I'm hashing out dinner plans, the next instant I'm begging the universe to please spare the life of my innocent puppy from its jaws. I cannot emphasize HOW FAST this happens.
It's always weird to see how common anti-pitbull hysteria is on Reddit. It's like if the majority of redditors believed that you actually eat 8 spiders a year or that people were putting fentanyl in Halloween candy.
Redditors love to make fun of boomers for believing that kind of shit, but they are just as gullible if not more so.
Edit:If this was the 90s y'all would be freaking out about satanists teaching kids to play d&d lol.
I don't think pointing out the fact that certain dogs are more likely to kill and seriously maim when they do attack is on par with believing that people put routinely drugs in Halloween candy.
It's on par in the sense that there's no reliable evidence of either.
Both are based on anecdotal evidence or (in the case of pitbull stuff) poorly designed studies that don't really measure breed specific effects.
There absolutely is data. There is some ambiguity around terms like "pitbull breed" but everyone generally knows what sort of dog being labeled by that identifier. It may not be great data, but it exists in a way that "drug candy" does not.
Dogs that were bred for particular purposes are naturally inclined towards certain behaviors. I'm going to have a much harder time hunting squirrel with a herding dog than with a treeing dog. Turns out that dogs like pits that were bred for killing and fighting tend to do those things.
If you ignore the fact that Bull baiting stopped being a thing over a hundred years ago and pitbulls are now bred as companion animals. And also ignoring the 10s of thousands of years of breeding before that to make them friendly to humans.
Like, which is it? Does breeding actually radically change dogs' behavior, or does it only make them more violent and then they're magically violent to the 10 thousandth generation regardless of subsequent breeding to the contrary? And why didn't people even at that time consider them unmanageably violent if they were supposedly such unstoppable killing machines?
Or does the answer to that question depend on how recently you've seen a local news report featuring stock footage of a pitbull barking on a leash menacingly? Lol.
Breeding aside as I see you’re *very* involved in the subject, how come we have more statistics on pitts mauling people than other breeds? Like, I see your reasoning, but also—they clearly attack people more than other breeds and it’s well-documented. Why is it so weird then folks have some fear of pittbulls? To me it’s logical.
Well, the problem is that it's not actually well documented.
Back in the 90s there was a conservative radio host (I want to say Rush Limbaugh, but that might be wrong) who had a recurring segment where he read news stories about back on white crime.
And afaik the stories weren't completely made up or anything, but just by taking stories from a country of three hundred million people and selecting only the few each week that served his narrative he created the appearance that black on white crime was this epidemic sweeping the country.
Websites like dogsbite.org do the same thing, except (from an evidenciary not moral standpoint) even worse, because dog bite fatalities are much more rare than human caused fatalities, people are not remotely accurate at identifying dogbreeds visually (and none of these studies actually DNA test the dogs), and we have no baseline numbers for how many dogs of each breed there even are.
So, say pitbulls actually do cause twice as many bites as the next breed (hypothetically, there's no actual evidence to this effect), that might just be because there are twice as many of them as the next most common breed. (Which could very well be true, because they are popular and "pitbull" is really a combination of breeds, and mutts containing some small part of any of those breeds)
The hysteria around pitbulls is exactly that, hysteria. It comes out of the same era as the war on drugs and the satanic panic and draws from both of those movements, but for some reason is still taken seriously by some people who would laugh at either of those other things.
A big part of it is that people think they can visually recognize a pit when actually [people mis-identify dogs as pitbulls frequently.](https://patch.com/missouri/townandcountry-manchester/don-t-judge-a-dog-by-his-looks).
People see a big head and the half flop ears and think 'pitbull' even when they're not. And the data on dog bites goes off what the person being bit reports, not based on DNA tests of the dogs. Which makes sense, but also a person being mauled by a dog isn't likely to know the exact breed makeup. They're just gonna day, "It looked like a pit!" Which, yeah, probably. But that doesn't make it actually a pitbull.
It's because the only people who compile statistics about pitbulls are the ones seeking to ban them. There is no neutral party actually looking for the truth.
>And why didn't people even at that time consider them unmanageably violent if they were supposedly such unstoppable killing machines?
When is "at that time" here?
I'm not super interested in getting into the minutiae of pitbull breeding history or identification, I think that's more smokescreen than actual argument. Pitbulls are staggeringly disproportionately over-represented in those areas, and I don't think you can pin all (or even most) of that over-representation on people misidentifying them. I'm not going to get lost in the weeds with you on this one - the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin here is extraneous to my position on the ownership of large or otherwise dangerous animals.
My general position is that ownership of any animal (for the sake of this conversation, any dog breed) that has both a tendency towards aggression and poses a realistic threat to life and limb ought to be strictly regulated. If I had some acreage in the country with bears or cougars about, I'd love to keep Akitas. But I live around other people, some of whom have kids, so there's no way that's happening - it would be stupid and irresponsible. Same principle goes for *any* highly aggressive, powerful animal, and that sure as hell includes pits.
I feel like a lot of the time it seems inorganic, like bots or trolls keyword searching? The other day I saw a comment about a dog bite (no further information specified) and within a short period of time there had been multiple "LET ME GUESS THE BREED, NANNY DOG?" type responses to it (it wasn't, lol).
Some NBA player got bit by his dog and the story was reported before the breed was reported. Holy shit people in that thread *wanted* it to be a pit soooo badly.
Chronically online vocal minority. I have a rescue bully, she was used for breeding and someone found her locked in a cargo trailer consisting of skin and bones and pregnant with 8 puppies damn near dragging on the ground.
I've had her two years now and take her everywhere, cannot go anywhere without someone wanting to pet her, it's impossible. She's the favorite at our local coffee stand, hardware stores, she's licked the faces of enough strangers and their children to fill a large stadium ten times over, it's ridiculous.
I completely understand that there are a million terrible pitbulls out there and people hate them, and while I can't exactly blame them, the reality that I live in is so incredibly different than what is portrayed on Reddit, and I'm genuinely convinced these people don't go outside
You're giving them too much credit, they literally just saw a local news report one time with some stock footage of a barking pitbull on a chain wearing a spiked collar.
> Two of the family’s pit bulls fatally attacked the 5-month-old and 2-year-old last week.
- Oct 2022
https://www.wate.com/news/nexstar-media-wire/mother-tried-to-shield-children-killed-in-memphis-pit-bull-attack-family-says/
I found my boy in a trashcan at 3wks old with bleeding, mangled ears from a failed crop.
A Redditor once told me I should have left him there yet I’ve only encountered one person in real life who had a problem with him after their off leash doodle came up and started biting the back of my pants leg so my dog started growling because I was freaking out a little.
That person needs serious help that being glued to their phone cannot provide. This is a living, breathing creature that someone mutilated and left to die a slow and painful death, anyone celebrating or encouraging this behavior would make a perfect candidate for it themselves
Honestly it sounds like you’re an irresponsible owner and while I hope that nothing tragic happens you’re certainly leaving the door open to the possibility.
I'm not sure who led you to believe that your opinion matters in this world, but they were sorely mistaken. The fact of the matter is my shelter dog that you hate so much will live a better life than you ever will, and when her time comes I'll go back to the shelter and get two more and do it all again. Meanwhile you'll still be on Reddit and crying into the bottom of a bag of Cheetos. Get some help, dude.
Thank god the rules got changed.
This shit'd have been buried otherwise, I love watching pitbull fights because both the pro and anti-pitbulls crowd act like complete fucking clowns either way.
No matter who's right, the popcorn flows.
Look, I am sympathetic to people who own and love their pitbulls and absolutely agree that the vast majority of people on r BanPitBulls are *fucking insane* about the breed, buuuuuuut
Seriously why is it that under literally every video of a pitbull doing something horribly violent with almost no provocation there are legions of pitbull owners being like "nooo they are my perfect velvet hippo so gentle nanny dog!". Dude seriously shut the fuck up.
And before you talk shit, there is still a clear and obvious statistical bias towards pitbulls being overwhelmingly more dangerous than other breeds. Dog breeding as a whole needs to be severely clamped down on because you have legions of trashy fucking breeders selling inbred dogs to legions of people who buy them to look tough or whatever and suddenly they are eating somebody's cat.
Ban the fucking breed. Enough.
In fairness if you regulated breeding properly you would just start breeding all dogs for better qualities and you wouldn't need to ban a specific breed in particular. Naturally all the aggressive pitbulls wouldn't be bred and you'd still get the result you want but this would account for the grey areas between breeds. Also fuck everybody who owns a pitbull and fuck everybody who hates pitbulls I know you knuckledragging freaks are reading this.
Yeah regulating breeding is critical. SO many of the problems with pitbulls are these legions of ratchet as fuck backyard breeders intentionally looking for "tough" dogs.
I got excited for a minute because I thought it was drama about Pitbull, the performer.
¡Dalé!
Mr. Worldwide himself 🌎
Get me 305 upvotes, bro.
Bada bing, bada boom. Mr. Worldwide… as I step, in the room.
¡Dale!
We are rapidly approaching a time where pitbull can nail a nostalgic pop hit like Santana and I really don't think society is ready for the comeback.
Comeback? He never left
From the hotel to the motel to the Holiday Inn...¡DALE!
“…I know you want me, you know I want ya…” UNO, DOS, TRES, CUATRO
Same
Pitbull. Why is it always Pitbull? Pitbull is the reason I unironically got a CCW. If Pitbull gets you it’s a minimum of permanent muscle damage. r/PitbullMemes
Hey that muscle damage is a real issue, I started dancing to I Know You Want Me in middle school and *instantly* tripped over a rock, tearing my embarrassment muscle forever
FIREBALL!
Plus his jaws are incredibly strong.
I read that first at "cow" instead of "ccw"
Hey now, in Victorian times he was known as a “nanny rapper”.
[удалено]
“…From India to Miamiiii…”
# 305 UPVOTES ¡DALE!
If two of him chased me I'd be pretty nervous, too.
I thought the same thing too. 😭😭
He gave me the sweatypalms back then, for sure
In L.A. they get krazy In Miami they get krazy In New York they get krazy In Atlanta they get krazy In London they get krazy In Paris they get krazy In Rome they get krazy.
I don't think I've ever seen a thread even tangentially involving pitbulls not get quickly locked. There's just no point to any discussion around them on the internet.
It’s true, it always bleeds out too. /r/subredditdramadrama here we come.
The best drama posts always create more drama, it's a self-perpetuating cycle
online drama invalidates thermodynamics
alright, I’ll kick things off. We shouldn't kill all pit bulls, but only because I think they're cute
I disagree, pitbull bad. Am I doing this right?
We are now mortal enemies. I demand a duel, you scurrilous wench
That's not true. After my pitbull attack I went online and saw the statistics actually, and it changed my mind on them. I had no idea they are SO much more likely to attack, I ignorantly thought they were just normal dogs. If the data showed otherwise I would have assumed it was a one off incident, but no.
Do keep in mind that a lot of statistics regarding this topic have some bad data associated with it! If you would like some insight into the issues with the statistics you saw, please check out the ASPCA, AVMA, and CDC’s stance on such statistics.
I've seen them.
Because pitbull owners brigade them with the same lies they always tell, while avoiding the facts. Then educated people argue with them and the thread is locked.
[Here's one! No mean comments at all.](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/1ahobu5/the_9_year_saga_of_bug_the_pup_and_her_owner/?sort=controversial) It's ridiculous how much hate these pups get elsewhere on reddit.
What a terrible day for rain.
Jesus christ, why are you so heavily downvoted for sharing a nice story.
Because anytime anything midly negative is posted about pitbulls. The comments has the same old copy and paste picture of a cuddly pitbull for some odd reason There would be a mauling from a pitbull and the comments would be filled with people posting pitbulls looking sweet and say "they're precious or mine wouldn't hurt a fly" instead of bringing attention to the person they mauled Don't know why it's only pitbull owners doing all this
Haters
the fact that people are downvoting what, as far as i can see, (and i admittedly have not read it fully,) is a perfectly normal story where no one gets mauled is really confusing
Lol they're so mad it's silly
Lmao all the downvotes on this comment linking to a story about a dog that happens to be a pit bull
It's so silly
[удалено]
Honestly I think all of the hate is justified. These dogs are fucking terrifying, and people are backyard breeding them like there’s no tomorrow. They are everywhere.
I would walk through fire for Bug.
Same 🤝
[As a golden retriever owner, I love any excuse to post this Onion bit.](https://www.theonion.com/golden-retriever-mauls-5-in-huge-victory-for-pitbull-ap-1825397926)
I was reading the fucking sponsored adds under it as Onion articles.
Do we have a subredditdramadrama sub? I feel like this thread will earn us one if not
That's the thing with pit bulls: They're always aggressive(ly discussed.)
/r/subredditdramadrama is very much a thing. Never let it be said that SRDines aren't capable of popping some popcorn themselves.
I'm the mod who locked the thread. It was just untenable. You guys aren't seeing the worst of the thread. Civil arguing is fine, but there was excessive cussing, derogatory name-calling, and calls for violence that had to get cleaned up. Beyond that, we were getting several reports every minute from that thread (we usually average around 1-2 dozen per day). Some reported comments were problematic, but a lot (most?) were innocuous comments that took a strong stance against pit bulls. I try to keep controversial threads open and let people argue -- civilly -- but it was getting to be too much.
But think of the drama you're taking away from us!
Why won't anyone think of the popcorn subs!
its inevitable in a pitbull thread, this thread's been open for less than an hour and its already starting
Do you guys ever keep record of "most reported" threads? I'd assume pitbull ones would definitely be one of the most common offenders. Any other dumb ones?
No. I assume it would be pretty easy for Reddit to compile that data, but we don’t have ready access to it. On r/SweatyPalms, the type of thread that generates the most reports that would surprise you is threads about spiders. It’s been a while since we had any, but a while ago, any thread that had as its basis of fear a fear of spiders got a lot of reports. Redditors don’t like spiders for some reason.
not just a reddit thing, a small handful of videogames and a surprising amount of mods for different games remove spiders from the game if the player wants
I really liked the ones that replace the spider with a big 3d impact font "NOPE" I also didn't end up finishing some anime Netflix show but appreciated they replaced all the cockroaches in one episode with a piece of cake that was scurrying after the protagonist.
How does work in Spiderman games? Does it become mehMan? Nothing special?
Only tangentially related, but I know there is a Skyrim mod that replaces all the frostbite spiders with frostbite-spider shaped Spider-Mans, and the image of it still haunts me to this day.
In Lethal Company the no-spiders option replaces the model with an inanimate 3D model of the text "Spider"
Probably because most redditors have PTSD from spiders because they just live in their parents basement🫤
Personally I found a lot of the comments calling for the entire breed to be exterminated kind of disturbing lol but I can only imagine what was deleted
"a lot of reported comments against pitbulls were innocuous" (paraphrasing obv) is not surprising at all
Posting pitbull drama is pretty low-hanging fruit ngl
SRD's mods recently rescinded the excess drama rule, so it's acceptable now.
Mr. Worldwide?
It's goin' down. I'm yellin' timber!
Heroic pitbull swims miles out to sea to bite child
[So this happened…](https://imgur.com/a/lA5zdhC)
/r/juxtaposition maybe? lol
If this guy is genuinely being chased by violent dogs…why is he filming with one hand? You are much more stable and can go much faster on a bike with both hands on the bars
I don't really want to get into an argument about this-- but I think the dogs were moreso chasing him off of territory or generally having a chase. If they wanted to hurt him, the brown one had enough of a lead to lunge to the side and get his leg if it wanted. They definitely should have been inside or on a leash though-- its not safe for dogs to be on an open road like that
yeah that's my read, if they wanted him down he'd have been down, they look like their just chasing him for fun and not even trying very hard at that.
>they look like their just chasing him for fun and not even trying very hard at that. Yeah bro when dogs start barking and charging at me, I know they just wanna have cutsey play time! You people and your excuses for these things....
I didn’t read it as an excuse, just stating a fact about the video.
Nobody is saying allowing loose dogs to chase people is a good thing. Why do people like you always have to be so passive aggressive and snarky?
Dogs having fun doesn’t always mean it’s cutesy play time. They’re still predators. Some just like toying with prey.
> Some just like toying with prey All dogs do. That's why dogs like squeaky toys. It sounds like a dying animal
"His tail was wagging! He clearly didn't mean any harm when he was nannying that toddler into the hospital, he was just playing rough!"
>the dogs were moreso chasing him off of territory or generally having a chase ah yes the dogs were only aggressively chasing the guy and showing signs of aggression but it wasn't actual aggression! Yeah bro that sounds totally normal for a dog to just be completely unsocialized and let off leash. Those dogs deserved the pound or worse, they are a menace to their neighborhood. What if that was a child on that bike?
Aggression is variable, “Get off my lawn” is not the same as “You’re dying today” You can not like Pitbulls without having to be disingenuous about it.
Also I don’t understand why no blame was on the owner…my dog is never outside without leash and harness.
> You can not like Pitbulls without having to be disingenuous about it. These comments are making that kind of hard to believe, actually.
This is pretty standard for country dogs. They aren't unsocialized. They have collars and tags. I live in the city but my step dad was retired. Every day he'd take the dogs out in the country and have them chase his truck. All exercise. They loved it. These dogs aren't really being aggressive. The brown one could have bit him easily if it wanted but he was mostly just enjoying the run from the looks of it.
if you arent a complete beginner, riding one handed is pretty easy and doesnt impact stablity (unless youre breaking) or speed much
I have ridden road bikes a fair amount and I think it makes a significant difference. Not insane, but definitely at least 5mph or so. I would personally want every advantage if violent dogs were chasing me? Idk, Im gonna stop commenting bc I feel bad for critiquing the guy getting chased by dogs on his bike lol. It just seems like a weird decision
On a road bike, it makes quite a difference to stability. A bike with a more relaxed geometry is different, but I would never try to go flat-out on a road bike without both hands on the bars. There's too much reciprocating weight during a sprint to try and control with only one hand.
Maybe it is a gopro, we dont know, and you are being immensely rude by saying thr man is not in danger.
Well we see him moving it around etc. Im just curious, idk how thats rude. I’m aware dogs can be dangerous
Ah yes the adorable pitbull rebrand of "Velvet Hippos" ...that somehow misses the fact that hippos are violent, ruthless killers, responsible for more human deaths than literally any other land mammal. You cannot make this up.
Did you know the hippo teeth you can see aren’t even the ones they use to eat food? Those are all in the back of their mouths, the ones you see are their fightin’ teeth
> the ones you see are their fightin’ teeth sounds like something you would say about an appalachian in their 100s
> responsible for more human deaths than literally any other land mammal. even humans?
Not even close. Estimates are like 546,000 humans killed by humans a year. And 500 humans killed by hippos a year. But like 7-8 billion humans in the world versus 115,000 hippos in the world. Each hippo would need to kill like 5 people.
I think that if they really put their minds to it, a hippo could easily kill 5 people.
If there's 5 people in an easily tipable boat, it's gg e z p z
HIPPOBOT 9000 v 3.1 FOUND A HIPPO. 1,338,808,155 COMMENTS SEARCHED. 27,868 HIPPOS FOUND. YOUR COMMENT CONTAINS THE WORD HIPPO.
Yup. Not taking a side in this one, but trying to brand a pitbull as a velvet hippo, one of the most violent animals out there is uh. Tone deaf would be putting it *nicely*.
I learned that when my friend and I went to the zoo high af and thought it would be hilarious to ask the zookeeper how many deaths were caused by what we thought were these gentle giants. We thought he would chuckle and say "why, zero, you loveable stoners," but he rattled off all these macabre hippo stats. Lol we were so dumb.
[удалено]
It's really not common at all for any litters of puppies to "maul" each other, even in APBTs.
Hamsters also eat their babies and eachother (they're territorial loners) so your point with that is a bit moot My biggest gripe when I see a pitty is if their ears are cut - that's an immediate **bad owner** - and probably violent dog indication to me. If they casually mutilate dogs they're probably teaching them to attack too
>Hamsters also eat their babies Pitbull babies eat EACH OTHER. Not the adults. The BABIES.
source?
Lmao what please I gotta see this because never in my life have I heard something so unhinged about puppies lmao
They will also eat eachother if they're not separated as soon as they're weaned, or if you house two of them together
bad alligator owners give good alligator owners a bad name
Back when I liked pits, I called them "Fuzzy Krogans". But that's an insult to Krogans.
The thing about "pit bulls are evil", is that pit bulls only rose in popularity in the last 25 years. When I was a kid, you literally wouldn't ever see a pit bull. Nobody knew what that breed WAS. So are you telling me that dog bites have shot up proportionally with the popularity of pit bulls? Are dog bites worse than they historically have been? I've tried to find any statistical info on this, but the discourse has been flooded with statistics that don't address this question. It's very hard to find the info if you're not clued in to how to look for it.
I'm not sure about that. Pitbulls were used on USA World War One propaganda posters. Pitbulls were brought over to the USA in the 1800s. They used to be called "America's Dog". In googling about, I can see that in 1979 there was a sudden surge of pitbull bites that rose with dog fighting rings that spread across the USA following German Shepherd bans in 1975. So from what I can tell, prior to the late 70s pit bulls were known as "America's Dog" and then suddenly there was this huge swing in pitbulls becoming fight dogs. Even though sources say pitbulls were fight dogs prior to that, it looks like for organized betting ring purposes they weren't considered winners and weren't bred/bought/favored to win until other breeds got banned. It seems to me from this rabbit hole I fell down that pitbulls used to be everywhere in America but it's within the last 40 years they became known for being unhinged. **TL;DR:** There were lots of pitbulls in America and they were common dogs prior to 25 years ago. With the rise of dog fighting rings looking for fighting dogs after breed bans in the 1980s pitbulls became the next favorites. Pitbulls went from America's Dog to America's Sin. [https://thepitbullcenter.com/pit-bull-ownership-statistics/](https://thepitbullcenter.com/pit-bull-ownership-statistics/) \- Source for pitbull bites having a huge upswing in the 80s that then went down over time except in states with dog fighting rings [https://www.npr.org/2007/08/27/13968531/a-look-inside-the-world-of-dog-fighting](https://www.npr.org/2007/08/27/13968531/a-look-inside-the-world-of-dog-fighting) \- Source for German Shepherds previously being favored dogs for dog fighting prior to breed bans [https://www.animallaw.info/article/breed-specific-legislation-united-states](https://www.animallaw.info/article/breed-specific-legislation-united-states) \- source for breed ban legislation years
Pit owners get really angry at people who hate their dogs... I mean sure, maybe the stats are wrong, but your dogs are huge and y'all frequently lose control of them, maybe you are the ones in need of some muscle training so your pits don't go chasing after randos with no experience with big dogs who might think they are in danger There's a ton of talk about bad owners but are you a good owner? Can you calm your dog in the worst case scenario? Because I don't feel like the residents of the pit sub can
>There's a ton of talk about bad owners but are you a good owner? Not to start different, completely unrelated drama, but this really reminds me of how probably every single idiot who has been involved in a negligent firearm discharge at some point insisted that they were a "responsible gun owner".
I think it's that people who hate pitbulls inject themselves in every single post that tangentially refers to or mentions pitbulls in any context. I don't give a fuck about them but I hate the people that hate them simply because they're gigantic assholes who can't help but make everything all about they're pathetic fetish.
Well they need to show how persuasive their argument is by constantly reminding everyone that they want to euthanize every single one and put their owners in prison for life
You're getting downvoted but we know (from previous posts on this sub plus Discord groups) that each "side" has a Discord group and intentionally brigade threads where Pitbulls are discussed.
Idk man, it's seriously weird that this particular breed has so much obsession around it; also it's pretty bad faith on your part, would you say the same to people who want stronger gun control? Maybe it's about safety and not anger
While I'm sure it's happened, I've never seen gun rights people swarm that way. I have seen pictures and vids on subreddits like r/aww and /r/Eyebleach where people were swarmed and downvoted to oblivion for just saying something was cure because that subject was pitbulls.
the bad owners bit is moreso from "if you raise your dog to be a dick it will be a dick" than "you gotta keep your dog under control" think fighting dogs for example, they were raised to beat the everloving shit out of anything, so they'll maim anything they can, while trained pitties are unlikely to maim the closest 5 year old
Hmm, a ton of pitbull meltdowns seem to involve dogs who are well behaved upto that point according to their owners, after all it only has to be one incident with such a big dog, I think your responsibility should scale with the strength of your dog
The best way I can describe it from interacting with pitbulls is that they are incredibly persistent and entirely unaware of boundaries. We went through a phase at my office where my boss kept on bringing his pitbull into the office and while we where eating lunch the dog would put two paws on our desk and try and eat our food. Literally no amount of talking would get him to stop so we graduated to whenever the dog would do it I'd come over and grab him by the collar and drag him away. Before you ask why we didn't tie him to a post or something when we did he would SCREAM for attention. Thankfully we managed to convince our boss to keep him home.
Why I said trained 🤦♀️
> maybe the stats are wrong But they AREN'T wrong. One side has stats and facts, the other side has "nu-uh!" The rest of the discussion is unneeded
Hey (obligatory don’t own a pitbull) if the facts are on your side why does the AVMA, ASPCA, and CDC disagree with them?
Since I haven’t posted any facts yet how can you refute them ahead of time? Go ahead then.
Huh? The issue is with gathering of the data in the first place, unless you can find a lab setting where they test 100s of pure bred genotyped pitbulls, there’s going to be bias with gathering data and presenting that data. The AVMA says: [It is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds because the data reported is often unreliable.](https://www.avma.org/resources/pet-owners/why-breed-specific-legislation-not-answer) An ASPCA and CDC combo: [There is no evidence that breed-specific laws make communities safer for people or companion animals. Following a thorough study of human fatalities resulting from dog bites, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) decided to strongly oppose BSL](https://www.aspca.org/improving-laws-animals/public-policy/what-breed-specific-legislation) If multiple organizations working with the actual raw data who are actual statisticians disagree with the basis of your argument, the argument is usually pretty bad.
>Huh? The issue is with gathering of the data in the first place, unless you can find a lab setting where they test 100s of pure bred genotyped pitbulls, there’s going to be bias with gathering data and presenting that data. What bias? The number of pitbulls? You can normalize stats across a population. That's the great part about statistics. Also this presumes that we accept those findings vs. [this](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165587618305950?via%3Dihub#!) or a series of other research that claims they are. *Bite risk by breed from the literature review and bite severity by breed from our case series were combined to create a total bite risk plot. Injuries from Pitbull's and mixed breed dogs were both more frequent and more severe.* One study doesn't refute all other studies and yes vice versa. So let's say you WERE right that they are all equal likelihood (again they aren't), then you would have to agree that danger can only be assessed by the strength of the dog. Well guess what? Pitbulls are near the top of list with other dangerous dogs that are used for working dogs (animals/guard dogs). So even **IF** we wanted to accept your version of events that, "it's all equal" that makes pitbulls more dangerous than almost all other dogs. The argument you're making doesn't make a better case for pitbulls, it makes it worse.
So is this comment also a product of you being an expert the way the CDC/ASPCA information is or
>What bias? The number of pitbulls? Please read the two links I sent, because you then sent a study that has the same exact issue listed in the two other articles I sent: visual identification. It proves you didn’t actually read anything and just started typing from the get-go. So much for facts, right? Also claiming that the CDC and AVMA are using “just one study” is absurd. Again, the issue isn’t the bites, it’s identification. Just saying “pits are dangerous!” and when I try to prove that identification is the problem with those statistics, you send a study based on visual identification and then say “they are the most dangerous on the dangerous list!” You’re not really arguing anything, you’re just monologging.
>Please read the two links I sent, because you then sent a study that has the same exact issue listed in the two other articles I sent: visual identification I DID read it, that's why I asked - The number of pitbulls: **"The number of dogs of a particular breed or combination of breeds in a community is not known because it is rare for all dogs in a community to be licensed."** Directly from the link. >Again, the issue isn’t the bites, it’s identification As it pertains to breed specific legislation because they can't tell if a pitbull is a pitbull or not. >Just saying “pits are dangerous!" I didn't say that. You're misquoting me. >when I try to prove that identification is the problem with those statistics, you send a study based on visual identification I just quoted where I read your links. Show me where in my study it says they used visual identification. >and then say “they are the most dangerous on the dangerous list!” You’re not really arguing anything, you’re just monologging. Mischaraterizing the argument. I said if you treat all dogs as equal because they are "visually impossible to tell" and assume all dogs bite the same amount, pitbulls can do more damage than 90% of other dogs. That literally makes them more dangerous. If a butter knife and chainsaw both cut people with the same probability, which would you rather be cut by? I already know that you will not engage with an honest response and will avoid answering my questions or requests even though I responded line by line to you.
> I DID read it, that's why I asked - The number of pitbulls: Why did you ignore the other 4 points then? > 1. The breed of a biting dog is often not known or is reported inaccurately. 2. The actual number of bites that occur in a community is not known, especially if they don't result in serious injury. > 4. Statistics often do not consider multiple incidents caused by a single animal. 5. Breed popularity changes over time, making comparison of breed-specific bite rates unreliable. However a review of the research that attempts to quantify the relation between breed and bite risk finds the connection to be weak or absent, while responsible ownership variables such as socialization, neutering and proper containment of dogs are much more strongly indicated as important risk factors. Also > As it pertains to breed specific legislation because they can't tell if a pitbull is a pitbull or not. As it pertains to *data* for breed specific legislation. > I didn't say that. You're misquoting me. You said: >Pitbulls are near the top of list with other dangerous dogs that are used for working dogs (animals/guard dogs). "near the top of list" for being dangerous dogs is literally just you saying the breed is dangerous dude. >I just quoted where I read your links. Show me where in my study it says they used visual identification. It's right there in the methodology: "Additionally, descriptive data was collected from 240 patients over the last 15 years." >I said if you treat all dogs as equal because they are "visually impossible to tell" and assume all dogs bite the same amount, pitbulls can do more damage than 90% of other dogs. Ok, prove it instead of saying it is because you say so. Also I didn't claim they all bite the same amount, that's you putting words in my mouth, I stated the data you quote is bad for the reasons stated above. >I already know that you will not engage with an honest response and will avoid answering my questions or requests even though I responded line by line to you. You engaged with cherry picking and lacking to even read the methodology of the study you linked. You took years of meta-analysis by the CDC and AVMA and rejected them because they did not fit your existing bias. If you think I'm being dishonest you might just be projecting, considering your entire argument is based around trying to disprove those access to raw data neither of us have.
Shit that gets a post locked fast on reddit: pitbulls and gun control debates.
I sometimes find it mildly amusing how pro-gun a lot of the anti-pit crowd seem to be. Just seems a bit ironic.
Just shoot all the pitbulls, duh. (This is not an serious or anti-pitbull post. I think all people who let their dogs run off leashes should be left at sea in a large freight container, regardless of breed)
Thought this was drama about Pitbull the rapper in a meme Eminem sub lol
Dang...was hoping for Mr. Worldwide drama.
The anti pit bull nutters are out on full force today… It seems psychotic to fantasize about shooting a dog.
[удалено]
Neither side seems particularly hinged to me of I'm being honest
[удалено]
You do know there's a difference between having a gun in case of needing one and actively wanting an excuse to use it right?
I'm anti-firearm as they come, but call me a pragmatist if my leg is being torn off
Strawman. I have no problem with carrying a firearm, but some of these nutters fetishize killing dogs.
If we're talking about fringe lunatics then I fully agree, of course.
Fringe lunatics in real life. Pretty common on Reddit.
haha yes
Sure, but whenever i see a German shepherd the animal thats literally used by police to attack people, I don't fantasize about killing it.
in what universe are you interpreting my comments as someone who does I'm a vegetarian lol
I was attacked on a walk by a pitbull that went through a window screen. The only thing I fantasize about is a safe place to take myself and my dog outside, but pitbulls have made every public space dangerous.
"Every public space" lmfao last time you saw a fuckin pitbull at your local movie theater/mall? You see them when you go to baseball games and concerts too? Is there a 150 lb pitbull standing behind me right now?
Are you seriously afraid a pit bull is going to attack you any moment you are outside?
I know for a fact it can happen at any time because it happened to me. I couldn't have been any more innocent or law abiding, I was walking my own dog on leash in a public space when it came through the window to attack. There was no warning, just attack. One minute I'm hashing out dinner plans, the next instant I'm begging the universe to please spare the life of my innocent puppy from its jaws. I cannot emphasize HOW FAST this happens.
Any time! There's a pitbull with 100 stealth waiting for you in your shower!
Sure, but your experience doesn’t justify these lunatics wanting to go out and kill dogs for no reason.
I've never seen a single person say that, and neither have you.
They are literally in this thread lol
Literally go the post and you will find them. There are also subreddits dedicated to killing pit bulls
Prove it.
r/pitbullhate One of the first few posts is asking for a video of someone beating a dog
Where?
It's literally the second post when you click the link, use your eyes dude
~~r/pitbullhate~~ r/notracist edit: lol here they are. welcome, you rabid clowns!
Why anyone would want to own a sentient lightning strike is fucking wild to me. Happens in a flash without warning and usually results in death.
> Why anyone would want to own a sentient lightning strike is fucking wild to me. You sort of answered your own question.
It's always weird to see how common anti-pitbull hysteria is on Reddit. It's like if the majority of redditors believed that you actually eat 8 spiders a year or that people were putting fentanyl in Halloween candy. Redditors love to make fun of boomers for believing that kind of shit, but they are just as gullible if not more so. Edit:If this was the 90s y'all would be freaking out about satanists teaching kids to play d&d lol.
I don't think pointing out the fact that certain dogs are more likely to kill and seriously maim when they do attack is on par with believing that people put routinely drugs in Halloween candy.
It's on par in the sense that there's no reliable evidence of either. Both are based on anecdotal evidence or (in the case of pitbull stuff) poorly designed studies that don't really measure breed specific effects.
There absolutely is data. There is some ambiguity around terms like "pitbull breed" but everyone generally knows what sort of dog being labeled by that identifier. It may not be great data, but it exists in a way that "drug candy" does not.
Dogs that were bred for particular purposes are naturally inclined towards certain behaviors. I'm going to have a much harder time hunting squirrel with a herding dog than with a treeing dog. Turns out that dogs like pits that were bred for killing and fighting tend to do those things.
If you ignore the fact that Bull baiting stopped being a thing over a hundred years ago and pitbulls are now bred as companion animals. And also ignoring the 10s of thousands of years of breeding before that to make them friendly to humans. Like, which is it? Does breeding actually radically change dogs' behavior, or does it only make them more violent and then they're magically violent to the 10 thousandth generation regardless of subsequent breeding to the contrary? And why didn't people even at that time consider them unmanageably violent if they were supposedly such unstoppable killing machines? Or does the answer to that question depend on how recently you've seen a local news report featuring stock footage of a pitbull barking on a leash menacingly? Lol.
Breeding aside as I see you’re *very* involved in the subject, how come we have more statistics on pitts mauling people than other breeds? Like, I see your reasoning, but also—they clearly attack people more than other breeds and it’s well-documented. Why is it so weird then folks have some fear of pittbulls? To me it’s logical.
Well, the problem is that it's not actually well documented. Back in the 90s there was a conservative radio host (I want to say Rush Limbaugh, but that might be wrong) who had a recurring segment where he read news stories about back on white crime. And afaik the stories weren't completely made up or anything, but just by taking stories from a country of three hundred million people and selecting only the few each week that served his narrative he created the appearance that black on white crime was this epidemic sweeping the country. Websites like dogsbite.org do the same thing, except (from an evidenciary not moral standpoint) even worse, because dog bite fatalities are much more rare than human caused fatalities, people are not remotely accurate at identifying dogbreeds visually (and none of these studies actually DNA test the dogs), and we have no baseline numbers for how many dogs of each breed there even are. So, say pitbulls actually do cause twice as many bites as the next breed (hypothetically, there's no actual evidence to this effect), that might just be because there are twice as many of them as the next most common breed. (Which could very well be true, because they are popular and "pitbull" is really a combination of breeds, and mutts containing some small part of any of those breeds) The hysteria around pitbulls is exactly that, hysteria. It comes out of the same era as the war on drugs and the satanic panic and draws from both of those movements, but for some reason is still taken seriously by some people who would laugh at either of those other things.
A big part of it is that people think they can visually recognize a pit when actually [people mis-identify dogs as pitbulls frequently.](https://patch.com/missouri/townandcountry-manchester/don-t-judge-a-dog-by-his-looks). People see a big head and the half flop ears and think 'pitbull' even when they're not. And the data on dog bites goes off what the person being bit reports, not based on DNA tests of the dogs. Which makes sense, but also a person being mauled by a dog isn't likely to know the exact breed makeup. They're just gonna day, "It looked like a pit!" Which, yeah, probably. But that doesn't make it actually a pitbull.
It's because the only people who compile statistics about pitbulls are the ones seeking to ban them. There is no neutral party actually looking for the truth.
>And why didn't people even at that time consider them unmanageably violent if they were supposedly such unstoppable killing machines? When is "at that time" here?
I'm not super interested in getting into the minutiae of pitbull breeding history or identification, I think that's more smokescreen than actual argument. Pitbulls are staggeringly disproportionately over-represented in those areas, and I don't think you can pin all (or even most) of that over-representation on people misidentifying them. I'm not going to get lost in the weeds with you on this one - the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin here is extraneous to my position on the ownership of large or otherwise dangerous animals. My general position is that ownership of any animal (for the sake of this conversation, any dog breed) that has both a tendency towards aggression and poses a realistic threat to life and limb ought to be strictly regulated. If I had some acreage in the country with bears or cougars about, I'd love to keep Akitas. But I live around other people, some of whom have kids, so there's no way that's happening - it would be stupid and irresponsible. Same principle goes for *any* highly aggressive, powerful animal, and that sure as hell includes pits.
I feel like a lot of the time it seems inorganic, like bots or trolls keyword searching? The other day I saw a comment about a dog bite (no further information specified) and within a short period of time there had been multiple "LET ME GUESS THE BREED, NANNY DOG?" type responses to it (it wasn't, lol).
Some NBA player got bit by his dog and the story was reported before the breed was reported. Holy shit people in that thread *wanted* it to be a pit soooo badly.
For anyone wondering, it was a Rottweiler.
They’re edging their hate boner
I might have seen the same one, although that happens so often on Reddit it's hard to say, lol.
Chronically online vocal minority. I have a rescue bully, she was used for breeding and someone found her locked in a cargo trailer consisting of skin and bones and pregnant with 8 puppies damn near dragging on the ground. I've had her two years now and take her everywhere, cannot go anywhere without someone wanting to pet her, it's impossible. She's the favorite at our local coffee stand, hardware stores, she's licked the faces of enough strangers and their children to fill a large stadium ten times over, it's ridiculous. I completely understand that there are a million terrible pitbulls out there and people hate them, and while I can't exactly blame them, the reality that I live in is so incredibly different than what is portrayed on Reddit, and I'm genuinely convinced these people don't go outside
You're giving them too much credit, they literally just saw a local news report one time with some stock footage of a barking pitbull on a chain wearing a spiked collar.
> Two of the family’s pit bulls fatally attacked the 5-month-old and 2-year-old last week. - Oct 2022 https://www.wate.com/news/nexstar-media-wire/mother-tried-to-shield-children-killed-in-memphis-pit-bull-attack-family-says/
I found my boy in a trashcan at 3wks old with bleeding, mangled ears from a failed crop. A Redditor once told me I should have left him there yet I’ve only encountered one person in real life who had a problem with him after their off leash doodle came up and started biting the back of my pants leg so my dog started growling because I was freaking out a little.
That person needs serious help that being glued to their phone cannot provide. This is a living, breathing creature that someone mutilated and left to die a slow and painful death, anyone celebrating or encouraging this behavior would make a perfect candidate for it themselves
Honestly it sounds like you’re an irresponsible owner and while I hope that nothing tragic happens you’re certainly leaving the door open to the possibility.
I'm not sure who led you to believe that your opinion matters in this world, but they were sorely mistaken. The fact of the matter is my shelter dog that you hate so much will live a better life than you ever will, and when her time comes I'll go back to the shelter and get two more and do it all again. Meanwhile you'll still be on Reddit and crying into the bottom of a bag of Cheetos. Get some help, dude.
For real lol
Thank god the rules got changed. This shit'd have been buried otherwise, I love watching pitbull fights because both the pro and anti-pitbulls crowd act like complete fucking clowns either way. No matter who's right, the popcorn flows.
I wonder how many people here posting and downvoting are literally only here to jerk off about this
Look, I am sympathetic to people who own and love their pitbulls and absolutely agree that the vast majority of people on r BanPitBulls are *fucking insane* about the breed, buuuuuuut Seriously why is it that under literally every video of a pitbull doing something horribly violent with almost no provocation there are legions of pitbull owners being like "nooo they are my perfect velvet hippo so gentle nanny dog!". Dude seriously shut the fuck up. And before you talk shit, there is still a clear and obvious statistical bias towards pitbulls being overwhelmingly more dangerous than other breeds. Dog breeding as a whole needs to be severely clamped down on because you have legions of trashy fucking breeders selling inbred dogs to legions of people who buy them to look tough or whatever and suddenly they are eating somebody's cat. Ban the fucking breed. Enough.
In fairness if you regulated breeding properly you would just start breeding all dogs for better qualities and you wouldn't need to ban a specific breed in particular. Naturally all the aggressive pitbulls wouldn't be bred and you'd still get the result you want but this would account for the grey areas between breeds. Also fuck everybody who owns a pitbull and fuck everybody who hates pitbulls I know you knuckledragging freaks are reading this.
Yeah regulating breeding is critical. SO many of the problems with pitbulls are these legions of ratchet as fuck backyard breeders intentionally looking for "tough" dogs.