Want to criticize pitbulls? Do it here!
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Since that a chart of dogs with powerful bites, actually yeah -- it's pretty powerful (though, uh, who even knows if that chart is accurate, that's not a particularly great source). A PP was comparing pits to golden retrievers, not Dobermans. You'll notice golden retrievers aren't on that chart. Are you okay with people "discriminating" against Rottweilers and Dobermans because the breeding and physicality of those breeds makes them more dangerous? Well that's why people discriminate against pits. It's the same issues, different degree. People also discriminate against dogs based on size all the time, because larger dogs are de facto more dangerous if they do attack (which is a risk with any dog -- even the most docile dogs can be provoked into attack under certain circumstances). So people will often choose to get smaller dogs if they have kids, if they live in a more populous area, etc. It's perfectly reasonable. Dogs are animals and it's just smart to exercise common sense about them. Getting defensive because some people are not comfortable with pits in certain setting is just pointless. You should know going in that if you get a pit, some people will be wary and not want to be around them. This is the same with other dog breeds. If you want a dog who will be welcomed by more people, get a smaller dog in a breed that is more universally liked. I don't see what the problem is here. |
Anonymous
I don't want a dog that is universally liked. I want to be able to walk my dog while being left the hell alone, which is part of why I like pits. For better or worse, most people's misunderstanding of the breed results in me being left unfettered, which I appreciate. The problem is that some people think they can legislate their dislikes, without citing cause or factual basis for a true need to do so, and hate on multiple breeds of dogs simply because they don't like the way they look, or the reputation they've been given by clickbait not-news articles and threads like this. I don't need them to like my dogs. I need them to mind their own business, the way we mind ours, and stay the heck our of our way, literally and legislatively. |
Anonymous
|
This is my neighborhood. https://moco360.media/2024/12/18/pitbull-fatally-shot-wednesday-after-attacking-two-women-in-bethesda/
I want to know which idiot neighbor has two pitbulls that they don’t keep secured. |
Anonymous
I'd like a public list of any a hole who doesn't keep their dogs secured. Sounds like the human(s) got bit trying to breakup a dogfight that never should've happened, and the end result is 2 dead dogs. How sad! Dog owners should be more responsible about securing and controlling their animals. But... if the "pitbull(s)" in question were really the vicious beasts y'all want to claim, how is anyone alive to tell this tale? This is literally a dogfight. Could've been any breed of dog. It's sad, and the owners of the loose dogs should be fined (honestly, they should be prevented from owning dogs), but this isn't a clear statement about the breed unless you're willing to say no other dogs behave this way, and they literally all can and do. It's sensational because "someone said pitbull". Someone said pitbull shouldn't be news. |
Anonymous
What?! One dog kills a dog and sends two adults to the hospital, and you think that doesn’t make it a vicious beast because the women aren’t dead too? That’s insane. This story would make the news anywhere regardless of the type of aggressive dog involved because gunshots and police sirens in quiet suburban neighborhoods are always newsworthy. It just so happens that, as is so very often the case, the vicious out of control dog turned out to be a pitbull. |
Anonymous
Missed the point, eh? This whole thread has pages of examples of ignorant idiots who think pitbulls just kill anything they see for the joy of it. If that were true, the women would be dead too. They're not. "as is so very often the case" Bro, this doesn't happen "very often" at all, which is why it makes the news. And if you want to talk about how many of the incredibly-infrequent incidents are pit bulls, you need stats on how many "pit bulls" there are vs. other breeds so that the context is factually represented. All of which has been said on this thread, ad nauseam, but, again, "someone said pitbull" and now... this (again). Y'all are a trope. It's like TDS. Pit Bull Derangement Syndrome or something... |
Anonymous
Nobody but idiots here is saying, definitively, that it was a "pit bull". Other interesting points: was the victim's dog leashed? Article says "with its owner", but not "leashed and under the owner's control." Was the dog that was with it's owner barking or acting aggressively toward the loose dogs? The owner of the loose dogs is at fault. Full stop. There aren't enough facts to place blame on the dogs. They're dogs. Any number of other variables could have contributed to this outcome. But, again, "someone said pitbull", so it's clearly a vicious dog doing "what pit bulls do" and we won't have any real legislation passed or laws created to actually stop the problem: someone's loose dog(s). |
Anonymous
"Sends two adults to the hospital" with minor, non life threatening injuries they probably incurred trying to break up a dog fight w/o knowing how (understandable, but still not smart). Again, this doesn't support the "pit bulls attack anything that moves" posturing so many of the haters use to justify their hate. |
Anonymous
No one has claimed that pit bulls attack anything that moves. You are having a weird response to an awful story. The aggressive dog (whatever it's breed), killed this woman's dog. That's terrible. As an animal lover, my heart breaks for the dog and for her. Disturbing detail: while the police waited for backup, the aggressor was left to EAT THE DEAD DOG in the yard. That's... very upsetting. If your first response to this story is to launch into a defense of pit bulls because the dog in this story did not also kill or maim two humans, that is a weird instinct. It's true that we don't actually know if the dog was a pit. Though pits are very easy to spot at this point because they are so common. |
Anonymous
NP but nobody thinks or has said such a thing, you absolute moron. Seriously, GFY. |
Anonymous
The linked story makes clear the aggressor was a pit bull. It is beyond bizarre to me that anyone reads this story and has an instinct to blame the victims of the attack, including a dog that the pitbull ate before it attacked the police officer/officers who put it down. |
Anonymous
I don't believe XL Bullies are pit bulls becasue they have other larger dogs bred into them |
Anonymous
To the haters, it's a "one drop rule" situation (I mean that in all the ways). Any percentage of any breed that "looks like an ugly pitbull" and it gets lumped into the "pit bull" pile. To sane people, you are correct. And better, clearer terminology would make it easier to have more functional laws and legislation on the subject, but... here we are. |
Anonymous
NO, the linked clickbait uses "pitbull" without anything to substantiate the claim, and even goes on to say that the police report does not list the breeds of any of the involved dogs. Someone posted it on this thread, which means it gets the context of this thread, which is a lot of shrill harpies making baseless accusations about the wild violence of "pit bulls". Nobody is blaming the victims. Smart people aren't even blaming the dogs. Liability for this incident is clear: the owner(s) of the loose dog(s). That doesn't mean that there aren't missing details, other complicating factors, etc. JFC the education in this country... |
Anonymous
Did you drop on the thread to tell me to go fsck myself, or have you read the whole thread, because they very much did, in multiple posts. I'm not going to be insulted by someone whose reading comprehension skills are worse than my youngest kid's. Sorry you're stupid. Try re-reading? |