this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
599 points (95.4% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26716 readers
4058 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Skkorm 65 points 10 months ago (9 children)

Assholes will get big dogs, abuse ignore and isolate them, then act surprised when they act unpredictably.

Breed specific legislation isn't the answer. The answer is for mandatory training courses predating dog ownership. All dog ownership too. Little dogs can be assholes too.

[–] [email protected] 42 points 10 months ago (31 children)

Breed specific legislation isn’t the answer.

When 1 breed is per capita significantly higher represented... yes it is.

Little dogs can be assholes too.

Little dogs can't kill you.

If we breed a dog to be the size of a hippo... Is that still okay to have? Even if it's only 6x as dangerous as the next breed?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago (3 children)

it's higher because people use pitbulls for dog fights, etc... if you abuse an animal it's more likely to attack someone.
if you look at stats, getting killed by a rotweiler or a german Shepard isn't that far off.
which would be the next two "tough dude" cool pets...
not to mention, pitbulls aren't even a breed, really... there's plenty of pit cousins that would be the new pitbulls... plus half breeds and whatnot...
my solution is to just require all small children carry revolvers... super simple, and those dogs will think twice before attacking them.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

We should just breed our toddlers to be vicious dog-killers machines, problem solved. I want my kid to be able to tear everything to shreds on the playground by the time he hits 6.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] someguy3 11 points 10 months ago (5 children)

They didn't just use pitbulls, they specifically bred pitbulls to fight and never give up. It's deep in their brain.

[–] Daft_ish 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

"Deep in their brain" is that a science term. I kid. I would like to know the science behind it, though.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

This is correct. My argument isn't just that they top the lists... it's ALSO that the damage they do is much higher than any other breed as well. These concepts are inextricably linked.

When a pomeranian bites you, it's whatever... bleeds a little bit, you put a bandaid on it later, but punt the fucker now. If a pitbull bites you... You might be missing part of your fucking leg. Try punting a pitbull...

We have more known attacks that are pitbulls simply because the damage they do is so fucking much more that it can't just be handled in private. It's actually probably 100% probably that pitbulls on average strictly bite at the same rates as other dogs... But the sheer amount of damage done by pitbulls means those bites = more deaths and hospitalizations. I've never once claimed that pitbulls bite more or less than any other breed, simply that they cause more casualties (and often specify deaths).

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (3 children)

This is correct. My argument isn't just that they top the lists... it's ALSO that the damage they do is much higher than any other breed as well. These concepts are inextricably linked.

This is called gameness and the trait is not inextricable for pit bull breeds. It was bred into them through selection, not too dissimilar to how those stubby faced breeds were bred to be that way (e.g. pugs).

If pit bull breeds were selectively bred to reduce/remove that trait it would change things. It’s almost like the root problem isn’t the dogs but the people and breeding practices.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Why then pick pits? I get emergency calls about dog attacks all the time. It's always pits. Assholes want asshole dogs. People use them to fight because they're monsters and will fight till the death.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It's more represented because morons buy that breed more than others. When they get banned it's other breeds that start attacking people.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (3 children)

It’s higher represented because morons buy that breed more than others.

You don't understand what "per capita" means do you?

When they get banned it’s other breeds that start attacking people.

Cool... I'll take being attacked by a pomeranian any day. I can at least punt those little fuckers over a fence.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (5 children)

You don't really understand how statistics work do you? Per capita can still get artificially skewed in favor of one breed or another. For an example, let's say we have red Legos and blue Legos and statistics say that murderers are more likely to pick red Legos. As a result, more people pick blue Legos because they don't want to be perceived as murderers, leaving the red Legos for murderers and people who are skeptical or ignorant of the statistics. The result will be that there's a much higher number of murderers per-captia with red Legos than with blue Legos.

The same can be applied to pitbulls. Create the story that pitbulls are man-killers, and the stats will get skewed as people looking for man-killers buy more pitbulls and people looking for companions intentionally avoid them. The result will be that there are more man-killer pitbulls per capita because that's what they're being trained for. It's called a self-fullfilling prophecy. Maybe pitbulls truly do have a disposition for being man-killers, however their reputation means that the stats will be skewed in favor of the man-killers trait, as more people will buy them to make them man-killers.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

Maybe pitbulls truly do have a disposition for being man-killers

Loved your comment, just wanted to chime in that what you’re referring to in the quoted portion above is commonly called gameness. Generally speaking it’s not that pit bulls are more prone to attack by default but their attacks are more unrelenting.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] khannie 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah the statistics on this are incredibly clear.

For the US this year it's overwhelming staffy / Pitbulls causing human deaths.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (29 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 10 months ago

I knew someone who had a badly behaved dog, it attacked their partner so they put it down.

A few weeks later "I'm getting another one and I'm going to train it myself" Meaning they just won't train it, lost their shit when someone called them out as a dog killer. People don't deserve animals, people suck.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

A minute of silence for all the people killed by asshole chihuahuas...

[–] Neon 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

how can you get killed by a chihuahua? it nibbles away your toe and you get an infection?!

[–] AquaTofana 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

They think that they're making a clever point. Of course larger dogs are inherently more dangerous than tiny dogs. No one is disputing that.

But to advocate for the complete wiping out of an entire breed versus mandatory training classes for owners is an insane answer.

Make "dangerous breeds" more difficult to get, sure. I agree with that. But I can NOT with the "wipe out all pitbull/rotties/dobermans/GSDs/etc"

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago (5 children)

A moment of silence for the victims of Labradors then.

Pit bull apologists refuse to just look at the numbers logically. We don't keep pet tigers, we shouldn't keep pet pit bulls.

[–] FriedCheese 7 points 10 months ago

I'd be suspicious that any lab that may have killed or severely injured someone isn't a "lab mix" like the shelters push out.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Wiping out? Why keep breeding something humans created in the first place. It's cruel to them and humans. Just like pugs and a bunch of other breeds that are cruel. Dogs are a human creation and humanity shoukd take responsibility and stop breeding them. Mutts are as close as natural and stable as you're gonna get.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nacktmull 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Wiping out? Why not just forbid malicious breeding goals, like aggression, bite force and of course torture / unhealthy breeding?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Yeah, for real. Pitbulls are the common target because they're the "vicious dog". It's a self-fullfilling prophecy. Talk about how pitbulls are vicious man-killers, people who want vicious man-killers buy them and train them to be vicious man-killers, pitbulls become vicious man-killers. Meanwhile, the people who want a family dog don't get pitbulls because, well, they're "vicious man-killers". The result is that statistics get skewed in favor of the "vicious man-killer" status, leading to people seeing the breed as nothing more than vicious man-killers.

[–] bustrpoindextr 4 points 10 months ago

That combined with the pseudoscience that was spewed by Merritt Clifton, that everyone still quotes today, and you've got yourself some statistical issues.

In case people don't know who Merritt is

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Behavior is influenced by genetics as well as environment. Certain individual animals are more genetically predisposed towards violence than others. Certain breeds of particular species tend to have more of these individuals than others. So, it is possible to have a breed that is violent in that: if you take a random sample of that breed where the individuals are subjected to an identical rearing process more of those individuals will be more violent than average than the average breed has individuals who are more violent than average. (I realize that sentence is probably difficult to digest, but I'm not going to spend 20 more minutes working on this).

Given the data that we have on pit bulls, I think they're a violent breed. Not all pit bulls are violent, but a pit bull is more likely to be violent than a golden retriever when the two are raised in the same environment.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Clbull 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I agree from both an animal welfare and public safety perspective that we need far stricter laws and regulations on dog ownership in general. But also I also think that some breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. For the American Bully XL in particular, we are talking a new pitbull-adjacent breed which has been bred for both aggression, intimidation and maximum muscle mass, both to skirt past existing legislation that bans American Pit Bulls, but also because all these traits appeal to the kind of irresponsible owners that just want an attack dog that looks 'aard as fuck.

We're also deluding ourselves when we claim that a dog bred to resemble the canine equivalent of Brock Lesnar is a nanny dog and wouldn't harm a fly, when in actuality losing control of a 145 lb jacked beast has even led to grown adults being mauled to death.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The only dogs to ever bite me are chihuahuas, and I worked as a vet assistant for years.

[–] Skkorm 3 points 10 months ago
load more comments (2 replies)