The Pit Bull Question

Pit bulls were responsible for 74% of dog bite fatalities in 2017 despite only making up about 6.5% of the US dog population.

In 2017, pit bulls killed:
38 humans
13,000 dogs
5,000 cats
20,000+ farm animals

Between the years 2005 and 2017, canines killed 433 Americans. Pit bulls contributed to 66% (284) of these deaths.

While pit bull advocates repeat “it's the owner, not the breed” as a mantra, the fact remains that genetics play a vital role in not only the aggression of dogs, but in the lethal nature of their attacks as well. Pit bull owners will often cite contradictory studies in which the author claims that breed is a non-issue, while still tacitly admitting that pit bulls are exceptionally dangerous by way of their genetic lineage.

Hundreds of generations of pit bulls originally bred for bull-baiting (holding a bull down by the neck as it's being castrated) and dog-fighting is difficult to ignore, especially when breeders and humane societies do little—if anything at all—to select for dogs with a people-friendly temperament. Ironically, dog-fighters (such as in the notable case of Michael Vick) accomplished more in the way of weeding out people-aggressive dogs by culling those who snapped on their handlers. The unrelenting tenacity of pit bulls and their renowned “gameness” in fighting other animals has long been inbred, along with their lowered sensitivity to pain. All dogs bite, but pit bulls are genetically predisposed to not let go. As the breed has grown in popularity, so too has the number of lethal dog attacks.

Pit bull advocates couch their arguments in the idea that pit bulls are somehow unfairly stigmatized by the media. While yes, there are a disproportionate amount of pit bull attacks reported in the news, the very same media they claim is biased will post fluff pieces about pit bulls being unfairly stereotyped. If breed is of no significance, it's highly conspicuous that pit bulls require a multi-million dollar lobbyist group with celebrities, marketing agencies, lawyers, and politicians at the helm. It's also conspicuous that the American Kennel Club only agreed to register pit bulls if they were registered as Staffordshire Terriers; and that humane societies/shelters deliberately misidentify pit bulls in order to mislead people into adopting them, even resorting to calling them “St. Francis Terriers.” It's simply unfathomable to these advocates that the disproportionate representation of pit bull attacks could possibly be a result of pit bulls disproportionately killing and maiming people.

The American Temperament Society is often cited to support the claim that pit bulls are less aggressive than other dogs, even though (according to their own official website) the results of the test are not a measure of the dog's aggression, nor is the test a scientific study with any statistical significance. Regardless, the overall aggression of pit bulls is not the issue at stake. The true problem lies in the fact that when pit bulls do display aggression and attack people, they don't stop until the person is either brutally maimed or dead. The difference between being bitten by a chihuahua and a pit bull is the difference between a band-aid and a skin graft. Along with the loss of life and limb, the cost of insurance claims and medical bills have skyrocketed as well. The economic strain of a dog breed that attacks families, neighbors, children, and police officers on a daily basis cannot be ignored. It's also worth noting that much of Canada has banned or severely restricted pit bulls and the reduction in dog bite fatalities has dropped significantly. The only dog bite fatality in Canada last year was a result of stray dogs.

Why are Americans allowing these delusional pit bull advocates to run roughshod over our personal safety with virtually no opposition? They've managed to outright ban breed-specific legislation in 21 states because a tiny percentage of the total dog population is a lethal menace that people are afraid of. This has got to stop.

Attached: DINDU NUFFIN PITBULL.jpg (719x911, 96.95K)

#notallpitts
#dindudoggies
#dogofpeace
#itsnotthedogitstheowners

Attached: 1471390495546.jpg (352x290 50.19 KB, 1.97M)

Pitbulls are the niggers of dogs

Attached: DYr5K6QU0AE8_oA.jpg (600x568, 41.95K)

56% of dogs

Like niggers, they kill because they have irresponsible owners.

Control the dog and the nigger, and there would be far less violence. This is trivial for a white man. We only have to get over our primitive notions of equality.

Attached: azn doggie.mp4 (480x480, 833.29K)

...

The problem is that this attitude completely ignores the genetic factor in this equation. Why do I need to have a PhD to be able to handle a pit bull, but nearly every other dog can be trained and reasonably expected not to snap (in a lot of cases, even without any training). The biggest issue with pit bulls is their tenacity and lowered sensitivity to pain. That, coupled with their jaw strength, is a deadly combination and the disproportionate amount of fatal pit bull attacks reflects this.

fuck forgot my sage and my name from shitposting that girlfriend pajeet fag.

Fuck. I was going to say something about proper domestication or to only keep cute doggos or something, but I like your post better.

Attached: e8f639cde0edebd768407aea1e1fa28b67c31a6a9bc934687c42790a8b36d33f.jpg (480x440, 85.69K)

Agreed, they are the niggest. Pit genocide now.

What is the jewest dog then?

Probably pugs.
Malformed and weak but people can't stop kissing their ass.

CLUE: The breed that's been banned from a ton of countries, restricted/banned in 900+ US cities, and every single military base. I'll let you take a guess now.

Attached: DYEFtpFUMAIxL4Pfdgf.jpg (500x500, 38.38K)

You don't need a PhD. You just need to know that a pit bull is going to be a little more aggressive than a regular dog, so you have to be more careful with it. Be very strict in maintaining dominance.

So they aren't family dogs or safe around children. I can dig this, but advocates willingly mislead people by claiming that shitbulls are some kind of "nanny dog" when they absolutely aren't.

firstly, this thread is shit
secondly, the high numbers of attacks by pit bulls may have something to do with the genetics of pit bulls, or some strains of pitbulls, BUT
it is, however, likely caused more by the tendency of criminals such as drug dealers and gang types to buy pit bulls specifically for the purpose of using them as weapons
so, the nogs and beaners buy a pit bull puppy, treat it like shit, train it to be violent and hostile to anything and everything, and the results are predictable.
bottom line: dogs are very impressionable. they become what they have been raised/ trained to be.
so, whatever


no
remove blacks and browns from White countries and send them to their own racial homelands
no more cross racial entanglement

Depends on the dog. Some pit bulls have extremely sweet dispositions. I had one like this, and was able to trust him around very small children (I was never more than a few steps away–never leave children alone with ANY large dog). But others would make me nervous about myself.


Niggers don't have a racial homeland. Africa belongs to the white man.

Why are German shepherds and not Rotties the dogs of nationalist?

its raycis to keep pitbulls away from a liberals newborn babby

Ironically, dog-fighters have done more in the way of selecting for non-"people-aggressive" dogs in pit bulls than humane societies and shelters who don't proactively measure that before adopting them out to single moms with a messiah complex. Most of these attacks are by dogs who were either owned by the victim or owned by a friend/neighbor of the victim and were unprovoked. Currently, most laws only punish owners or label the dog a "dangerous dog" AFTER it's already bitten somebody. I suggest a more proactive approach in legislating these animals as opposed to just playing Pit Bull Roulette and praying that the 100lb pitmommy next door doesn't let go of the leashes of her two 90lb meat grinders. It's a tiny percentage of the dog population and they do a massive amount of damage compared to any other dog. No other breed even comes close.

Attached: DYlKi7GW0AA_eRA.jpg (600x386, 28.22K)

Furthermore, these preferences go through cyclic trends. Right now, pit bulls are popular. Before that, it was Rottweilers. At one point it was German Shepherds.

If you hold a dog biscuit out my pit won't even take it from your hand unless you release it. He'll put his mouth on the other end and just wait for you to let go and if you don't after a few seconds he pulls back, looks at you like "come on man," then tries again.

"Not all pit bulls tho"

I'd rather not take that risk, especially when you have all these self-proclaimed dog-whisperers telling everybody that THEIR dog special and sweet and harmless, then years later they viciously maul them and their families to death. Tiny percentage of the US dog population. Nothing of value would be lost if we euthanized them all.

Gas the shitbulls, breed war now.

Attached: DW_K39HVAAA66_E.jpg (695x900, 141.36K)

Oh ok. Guess pits are great nanny dogs then.

Oh no, it's retarded.

No other breed has killed at the rate that pit bulls do. Rottweilers are a very very distant second in terms of fatalities.

Attached: DYnHSewVoAAztgT.jpg (681x378, 61.9K)

later term abortion dogs

Question is, why would you want a pitbull in the first place if you're not a nigger?

Attached: 19.jpg (960x720, 99.73K)

...

WE WUZ NANNY DOGS

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1252x630, 892.53K)

Yea, it's odd that most of the advocates I come across are white people claiming that pit bull attacks only happen because of ghetto hoodrats owning them, even though most of the fatalities I see are done by dogs owned by white women.

Attached: WGFD.png (500x380, 35.44K)

Attached: -.png (258x335, 132.68K)

Ya'll sound like the 'full semi-auto' crowd talking about 'pitbulls'.

Alright. Exactly which breed of dog would you like to ban? Because 'pitbull' is a colloquial term, not a UKC/AKC recognized breed.

See, that's where the shitbull advocates got you fooled. AKC came up with the name "Staffordshire Terrier" to disguise the fact that they were allowing pit bulls to be registered. Humane societies and shelters also refer to them as "St. Francis Terriers" to convince people they aren't pit bulls.

In either case, both the ABPT and staffy terriers are recognized by the UKC and AKC.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (476x497, 319.77K)

But that is obvious on the surface as most owners are niggers. Should we ban guns because niggers can't handle guns?