Pitbulls are not more genetically predisposed towards biting or mauling than other breeds and the supposed “statistical data” on the subject is based around a confluence of inaccurate metrics caused by 1) people not being very good at accurately identifying dog breeds, 2) existing groups that hate pitbulls pushing bad statistics for political purposes, and 3) a self-fulfilling prophecy of pitbulls having a bad reputation and actively being sought out by people who want vicious dogs and who will treat their dogs in such a way as to encourage that behavior. And I say all of this as someone who does not own a pitbull and probably never will.
So I think your 3rd point is highly likely, but I do disagree about the genetic predisposition. If it can’t be genetically influenced then goldens are not more friendly than others, and smart dogs (poodles, Australian shepherd, etc.) are not actually smarter; they all have the same genetic predisposition.
Having an aggressive breed is possible, but as I said earlier I think the 3rd point pushes up the numbers of maulings quite a bit. I’d add a 4th point of a lot of people being real shit dog owners and not knowing how to properly raise a dog to be socially capable without harming others.
Pit bulls aren’t genetically predisposed to attacking things, but when they do attack things, they’re genetically predisposed to doing a lot more damage than most other breeds. Gameness is a thing.
So are breed characteristics. It’s like people tout breed characteristics…until pit bulls. Then it’s like "no way! Mine wouldn’t hurt a fly!
Yea, that may be true but they were breed to hurt more than flies and we did a good job of it.
Dachshunds have breed characteristics, Chihuahuas have breed characteristics, Labradors have breed characteristics, golden retrievers have breed characteristics, greyhounds, etc. It’s almost like they were “bred” to bring out specific traits–both physical and behavioral.
Pitbull advocates act like they don’t exist or downplay their role in the breeds behavior. It’s bullshit. Pitbulls, as a breed, shouldn’t exist.
No breed of dog should exist because people shouldn’t intentionally breed dogs. It’s inhumane and most of them wind up in kill shelters. If you want a dog, adopt a mutt from a pound. It’ll be healthier and happier than any other dog you could get. That said, breed characteristics are something pushed by dog breeders themselves. The actual science suggests dog breed has little to no impact on temperament. https://www.science.org/content/article/your-dog-s-breed-doesn-t-determine-its-personality-study-suggests
Exactly. They are the assault rifle of dog breeds. People want to preach about bad owners and personal responsibility, but the fact is both are capable of way more damage, and next to no one needs them.
You want to tell me how a chihuahua is more aggressive? When was the last time one ripped out a woman’s throat? Sure, they can be more aggressive, just as someone with a 9mm revolver can be more aggressive than someone with an AR-15. But when someone kills and/or wounds dozens, it’s not done with a 9mm.
The problem is that terriers are very susceptible to Kushings disease, which can lead to very irratic behavior. That’s manageable when it’s a 20lb Boston Terrier, but horrifying when it’s a 60 lb terrier of any type.
The meanest, most dangerous dog I knew was an american eskimo owned by my ex wife. This was a 20 pound fluffball, and he looked like he would be friendly and fun to scratch behind the ears.
He loved to bite people, especially children. He had a specific thing he would do when someone looked at him: he would look up and smile, while vigorously wagging his poofy tail. You’d reach down to pet that brilliant white, angel-soft fur, and as soon as you were close enough, he would take a chunk out of your hand or arm. This wasn’t a playful bite, he would bite down hard and hang on.
but on the other hand anglos literally bred pit bulls to tear cattle apart while they were still alive (and it was actually illegal to slaughter cows in england using normal methods)
I’m not saying pitbulls necessarily are genetically like that but I wouldn’t be surprised.
But regardless, let us appreciate the fact that 1800s era brits thought that the only appropriate way to consume beef was by slaughtering it with a dog ripping it’s muscle off its back while tied to a pole. Even being killed by a pack of wolves or a lion would be more humane lol
I also want to add that my current dog is a 140lb Bull Mastiff/German Shepherd mix. I adopted her from a friend after my friend realized how big she would likely be.
My dog is now 7 years old and still just acts like a big silly puppy. She’s never bit anyone and is even friends with my cats.
However, if I had small children I probably wouldn’t have her because I’ve seen very nice dogs snap many times. Unfortunately, the size of the dog does correlate with the damage they could potentially do. I also make sure she can’t bite anyone or other pets if I have to take her out.
She loves everyone and everything but any dog can snap under the right circumstances and since we are not dogs coming we cannot read their minds and don’t always know what the circumstances are. I wouldn’t rule out rescuing a pitbull. All dogs are not the same. I think it’s all more an issue of responsible pet owners and knowing your dog the best you can.
Never forget though that accidents can and will still happen, even under the best circumstances.
a self-fulfilling prophecy of pitbulls having a bad reputation and actively being sought out by people who want vicious dogs and who will treat their dogs in such a way as to encourage that behavior.
I’m pretty neutral on dog genetics but tbh it still ends you at the same conclusion; not everyone should just be able to get the dog that kills you
Sure, I generally agree with that, but that being the case we should talk about dogs purely in terms of size and weight. Big dogs (and I mean ALL big dogs) are dangerous for the same reason big people are dangerous (potentially) - it’s why weight classes exist in competitive martial arts.
I know a lot of it is from what people did. When I was a kid in the late 80s/early 90s, we lived in a town which had many illegal dog fighters in it. They mostly chose pitbulls but not solely. We ended up saving one puppy from them and he was some sort of mastiff mix.
One of their pitbulls escaped once. I opened my door and it came running from out of nowhere, snatched my cat from beside me and shook her to death in front of me. It was so terrible.
They would do the worst things to these dogs. They would beat them, use food against them and for a long time it was even really popular to feed them gun powder to make them more aggressive.
They would condition their dogs in any way they could to make them good fighters and as aggressive as possible.
Pitbulls have a lot of sharp teeth and sturdy, muscular bodies, so they never had a chance with these assholes.
The dog breed I’ve personally seen get out of line as a pet and bite people the most is the German Shepard. That’s just my experience. Either way I believe that dogs are like people. They can have genetic tendencies but their environment will have the largest influence on them most of the time. I’ve never met an aggressive pitbull outside of those terrible dog fighter’s dogs.
What? Ours does snore. I never related it to her phenotype (she is a mutt but very pit looking). I agree she doesn’t seem bred for aggression and she isn’t high strung, reasonably relaxed and gentle with the cats, playful and rough with the other dog (they are both pretty young). But she is freakishly strong. Smaller than our other dog but weighs the same, it’s like she is a black hole.
Pitbulls are not more genetically predisposed towards biting or mauling than other breeds and the supposed “statistical data” on the subject is based around a confluence of inaccurate metrics caused by 1) people not being very good at accurately identifying dog breeds, 2) existing groups that hate pitbulls pushing bad statistics for political purposes, and 3) a self-fulfilling prophecy of pitbulls having a bad reputation and actively being sought out by people who want vicious dogs and who will treat their dogs in such a way as to encourage that behavior. And I say all of this as someone who does not own a pitbull and probably never will.
So I think your 3rd point is highly likely, but I do disagree about the genetic predisposition. If it can’t be genetically influenced then goldens are not more friendly than others, and smart dogs (poodles, Australian shepherd, etc.) are not actually smarter; they all have the same genetic predisposition.
Having an aggressive breed is possible, but as I said earlier I think the 3rd point pushes up the numbers of maulings quite a bit. I’d add a 4th point of a lot of people being real shit dog owners and not knowing how to properly raise a dog to be socially capable without harming others.
Science suggests this is not actually the case and that environment has a much larger impact on animal behavior than almost any factor: https://www.science.org/content/article/your-dog-s-breed-doesn-t-determine-its-personality-study-suggests
Never said it didn’t, just said the breed does have a disposition to it genetically
Fun fact, Golden Retrievers rank lower than Staffordshires(pitbulls) in many temperament tests…
https://www.aaastateofplay.com/what-dog-breed-has-the-best-temperament/
Pit bulls aren’t genetically predisposed to attacking things, but when they do attack things, they’re genetically predisposed to doing a lot more damage than most other breeds. Gameness is a thing.
So are breed characteristics. It’s like people tout breed characteristics…until pit bulls. Then it’s like "no way! Mine wouldn’t hurt a fly!
Yea, that may be true but they were breed to hurt more than flies and we did a good job of it.
Dachshunds have breed characteristics, Chihuahuas have breed characteristics, Labradors have breed characteristics, golden retrievers have breed characteristics, greyhounds, etc. It’s almost like they were “bred” to bring out specific traits–both physical and behavioral.
Pitbull advocates act like they don’t exist or downplay their role in the breeds behavior. It’s bullshit. Pitbulls, as a breed, shouldn’t exist.
No breed of dog should exist because people shouldn’t intentionally breed dogs. It’s inhumane and most of them wind up in kill shelters. If you want a dog, adopt a mutt from a pound. It’ll be healthier and happier than any other dog you could get. That said, breed characteristics are something pushed by dog breeders themselves. The actual science suggests dog breed has little to no impact on temperament. https://www.science.org/content/article/your-dog-s-breed-doesn-t-determine-its-personality-study-suggests
Exactly. They are the assault rifle of dog breeds. People want to preach about bad owners and personal responsibility, but the fact is both are capable of way more damage, and next to no one needs them.
You want to tell me how a chihuahua is more aggressive? When was the last time one ripped out a woman’s throat? Sure, they can be more aggressive, just as someone with a 9mm revolver can be more aggressive than someone with an AR-15. But when someone kills and/or wounds dozens, it’s not done with a 9mm.
The problem is that terriers are very susceptible to Kushings disease, which can lead to very irratic behavior. That’s manageable when it’s a 20lb Boston Terrier, but horrifying when it’s a 60 lb terrier of any type.
Omg thank you! The old place, you would’ve been downvoted 200 times and gotten death threats for saying this.
I did say this in the old place and people got PISSED.
I’ll bet they accused you of being an irresponsible pitbull owner and mockingly said some shit like “oh my little sweetie wouldn’t hurt a fly!”
Indeed they did.
Me too. Every. Fucking. Time.
The meanest, most dangerous dog I knew was an american eskimo owned by my ex wife. This was a 20 pound fluffball, and he looked like he would be friendly and fun to scratch behind the ears.
He loved to bite people, especially children. He had a specific thing he would do when someone looked at him: he would look up and smile, while vigorously wagging his poofy tail. You’d reach down to pet that brilliant white, angel-soft fur, and as soon as you were close enough, he would take a chunk out of your hand or arm. This wasn’t a playful bite, he would bite down hard and hang on.
but on the other hand anglos literally bred pit bulls to tear cattle apart while they were still alive (and it was actually illegal to slaughter cows in england using normal methods)
I’m not saying pitbulls necessarily are genetically like that but I wouldn’t be surprised.
But regardless, let us appreciate the fact that 1800s era brits thought that the only appropriate way to consume beef was by slaughtering it with a dog ripping it’s muscle off its back while tied to a pole. Even being killed by a pack of wolves or a lion would be more humane lol
I also want to add that my current dog is a 140lb Bull Mastiff/German Shepherd mix. I adopted her from a friend after my friend realized how big she would likely be.
My dog is now 7 years old and still just acts like a big silly puppy. She’s never bit anyone and is even friends with my cats.
However, if I had small children I probably wouldn’t have her because I’ve seen very nice dogs snap many times. Unfortunately, the size of the dog does correlate with the damage they could potentially do. I also make sure she can’t bite anyone or other pets if I have to take her out. She loves everyone and everything but any dog can snap under the right circumstances and since we are not dogs coming we cannot read their minds and don’t always know what the circumstances are. I wouldn’t rule out rescuing a pitbull. All dogs are not the same. I think it’s all more an issue of responsible pet owners and knowing your dog the best you can.
Never forget though that accidents can and will still happen, even under the best circumstances.
I’m pretty neutral on dog genetics but tbh it still ends you at the same conclusion; not everyone should just be able to get the dog that kills you
Sure, I generally agree with that, but that being the case we should talk about dogs purely in terms of size and weight. Big dogs (and I mean ALL big dogs) are dangerous for the same reason big people are dangerous (potentially) - it’s why weight classes exist in competitive martial arts.
I know a lot of it is from what people did. When I was a kid in the late 80s/early 90s, we lived in a town which had many illegal dog fighters in it. They mostly chose pitbulls but not solely. We ended up saving one puppy from them and he was some sort of mastiff mix.
One of their pitbulls escaped once. I opened my door and it came running from out of nowhere, snatched my cat from beside me and shook her to death in front of me. It was so terrible.
They would do the worst things to these dogs. They would beat them, use food against them and for a long time it was even really popular to feed them gun powder to make them more aggressive. They would condition their dogs in any way they could to make them good fighters and as aggressive as possible.
Pitbulls have a lot of sharp teeth and sturdy, muscular bodies, so they never had a chance with these assholes.
The dog breed I’ve personally seen get out of line as a pet and bite people the most is the German Shepard. That’s just my experience. Either way I believe that dogs are like people. They can have genetic tendencies but their environment will have the largest influence on them most of the time. I’ve never met an aggressive pitbull outside of those terrible dog fighter’s dogs.
On a tangent, I’ve seen many pitbulls breathing heavily. Is this normal for these dogs? Are other dogs races like this?
What? Ours does snore. I never related it to her phenotype (she is a mutt but very pit looking). I agree she doesn’t seem bred for aggression and she isn’t high strung, reasonably relaxed and gentle with the cats, playful and rough with the other dog (they are both pretty young). But she is freakishly strong. Smaller than our other dog but weighs the same, it’s like she is a black hole.