Oh, come on with that false equivalency BS. Owners can choose what breeds to buy (or just take in a stray), which also determines what gets bred! Pitbulls as a breed in general do tend to have higher aggression, that’s just a fact. And it’s well-documented by vets, breeders, groomers, etc.
That’s a little different than the war crimes of one dead racist guy who lived half a century ago…
Hi scientist here, I actually ran a study during my cursus about this and i didn’t find any significant difference between ‘dangerous breeds’ and others. The literature I found confirmed this hypothesis. If you have an article confirming this fact i would gladly appreciate it. If necessary i can give you some articles to read. As far as I’m aware it does not appear to be a fact.
You can’t because they didn’t. They just made it up as pitbull enthusiasts always do. On the other hand here’s a site that has numerous reports on dog bit statistics and also a link to the National Pitbull Victims Awareness collective. No other breed of dog has so many organizations dedicated to victims and no other group of animal supporters attacks victims like pitbull advocates do.
https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-multi-year-fatality-report-2005-2017.php
https://www.nationalpitbullvictimawareness.org/articles/medical-studies-on-pit-bulls/
Here is a report of US and Canada dog attacks from 1982 to 2009. (PDF download) https://www.dogsbite.org/pdf/2009-dog-attack-deaths-maminings-merritt-clifton.pdf
I don’t have a dog in this fight (heh) but no one arguing the other side has presented any evidence either. In my anecdotal evidence, it’s seems more that certain breeds are more powerful, so when they’re improperly trained, they cause more damage so they get more headlines
Also, those breeds attract a certain type of owner that either don’t train them or train them to be aggressive.
