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
[–] [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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago
[–] 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) (2 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 (1 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.

[–] yuriy 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Pits already are selectively bred to reduce/remove that trait. The only person who wants a pit suited for fighting is the exact person who should never own a dog anyways. Since there’s literally NO benefit to the trait, obviously breeders jump through a lot of hoops to not sell aggressive murder dogs.

People who casually imply that every pitbull is a fucking monster are so woefully illinformed, and usually completely unwilling to consider they don’t know all the facts.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

People who casually imply that every pitbull is a fucking monster are so woefully illinformed, and usually completely unwilling to consider they don’t know all the facts.

If this was directed at me I wasn’t implying every pit bull breed type is a monster.

Certified, professional breeders might be breeding out the gameness but the backyard breeders and the accidental breeders aren’t.

The number of pit and pit mixes in shelters aren’t coming from professional breeders or their dogs. Our second adopted dog is a mutt but dominant breeds are Border Collie and Am. Pit Bull Terrier. We’ve got her pretty well trained now, but if another dog comes snapping and biting at her I have to jump in to get a hold of her because she’s still got enough game in her that, if provoked, she goes hard in the paint.

I will always believe that pit type breeds are not for inexperienced or lazy dog owners. They need work, structure and training consistently.

[–] RBWells 2 points 10 months ago

This is key, it's like they are bigger than they appear. We inherited one. Sweet nature, good with the cats, but weighs the same as the bigger dog in the household and strong as fuck.

[–] daltotron 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It’s actually probably 100% probably that pitbulls on average strictly bite at the same rates as other dogs…

I'm sorry, but this is a probably 100% probably on average strictly convincing sentence you've got, there.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Oh man... I said "probably" rather than "probable"! I better go get the noose and hang myself cause @daltotron can't understand what a typo is!

[–] daltotron 2 points 10 months ago

No, I get that people type on mobile, and that autocorrect is a bitch. The thing that struck me more was that you hedged your bets like 4 times in the same sentence, against someone calling you out for not having any evidence of what you were claiming, but then you still end up using your claim to extrapolate an argument with what seems like a relatively large amount of certainty.

Also that the sentence was kind of repetitive, which struck me as funny. "probably 100% probable" is just saying the same thing twice, saying that something is "probably" the case is the same thing as saying it's "100% probable", and the "100%" part of that strikes me as completely superfluous. "on average strictly" is kind of contradictory, you usually wouldn't claim something to be "on average" but then also say that it is "strictly" that way, because an average is, you know, an average, it's an aggregate of numbers, including outliers. So it can't really "strictly" conform to whatever you're wanting it to conform to, unless it's an exact match of the average, or unless you don't actually mean "strictly" in the strictest sense. I dunno, I give it a C-.

The argument also strikes me as wrong, I would think pitbulls probably do just attack people more ,and with more aggressiveness, than other dog breeds. Maybe not that much more, relative to, say, german shepards, but say, compared to irish wolfhounds, I would think so, yeah. I think if an irish wolfhoud was attacking someone at the same rates, with the same aggression, as pitbulls, we would see them kill a lot more people than pitbulls do. Pitbulls aren't actually that big, relative to other dogs.

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I picked my pit because that's what the shelter had and she's incredibly sweet. Even with kids, they can pull her face meats and it doesn't even bother her.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

if an asshole dog fighting abusive owner can't get a pit, they'll get a rottweiler... which will also attack people if raised like that.
or german shepards...
see also: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogs_in_warfare

[–] [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.

[–] 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)
[–] [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)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

Do you really think these people go for Pomeranians instead? Not an American bulldog or a rottweiler or a doberman... No... They can't buy a Pitbull so they get a Chihuahua instead!

If a higher percentage of pitbull owners are morons then no shit there will be more attacks per capita, it doesn't mean that the breed is the issue!

Also the problem with these stats is that they're based on victim reports, victims that very often don't know dogs and will call any big dog with short hair a Pitbull. The stats are extremely unreliable and in most places there's just no actual tracking of the breeds that committed the attack. In places where there is, as I previously mentioned, attacks don't go down it's just other breeds that are reported and the attacks cause just as much damage because the dogs aren't any smaller.

load more comments (29 replies)