538
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2023
538 points (97.2% liked)
News
23367 readers
2694 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Jesus Christ! Why do people blame the dogs when it’s the owners responsibility. I have a pitbull that I took in from the pandemic. He is the sweetest dog in the world to me and my family. He is patient and gentle with my kids. We got a French bulldog puppy for Christmas. He is so gentle with her. If you come in my house and I am there. He will love on you and want pets.
But, if you come over and I act suspicious about you he won’t be pleasant. I keep a muzzle on him in public because he’s really protective of myself and my family. I am under no illusion that he loves everyone like us.
Here is the other thing. I have grown up with dogs most of my life. I’ve had Jack russle terriers. I’ve had Great Danes. I’ve had boxers. Ive had French bulldogs, and pitbulls.
Of all the dogs I’ve owned pitbulls are the hardest to train. They are not a beginner dog. You have to remember that just like people they have moods and personalities independent of your own. Just because that dog loves and is nice to the pack it lives around everyday doesn’t mean that same courtesy is extended to strangers.
"Jesus christ, why do people blame the dogs"
Then goes on to explain that it is in fact, the dogs.
Any dog is capable of maiming people. A full face muzzle and a pinch collar keeps that from happening. So, like I said. If people took the proper precautions. Then a dog attack can’t happen. But they think that their dog loves everyone like the dog loves its family.
So if a dog attack is fully preventable. Then it is the owners fault.
Any dog is capable of killing people, but you are deluding yourself if you think that a pitbull is not significantly better equipped to kill than any other dog breed. Gameness is a real trait. There's a reason the Internet isn't full of retrievers and cocker spaniels nearly killing horses.
Bro… it has occurred to me that I have stepped into god’s special ed class. You are the second or third person to reply to my comments without reading my comments. I said that I agree. Pitbulls are dangerous and very capable of killing.
However, as someone that has only been attacked by a Shiba Inu and a Rottweiler. I have broken up a few different dogs fighting. I can speak from experience that really all dogs should be muzzled in public.
If you want me to say that a pitbull is more capable of killing. Then you’ll have to tell me than what. Chihuahuas? Absolutely! Irish wolfhound or Rottweiler? Maybe not.
What I’m saying is people should be held responsible if their dog attacks someone. I am confident mine can’t attack someone. Not because he’s super chill or something. But because I make it so his bitey end can’t bite you. I’m beginning to think you guys don’t know what a muzzle is. I’m talking about a cage that covers his entire mouth.
Like this thread is making me lose faith in humanity. I’ve agreed with you guys this whole time. Please show me where I said that pitbulls are safe. Seriously, please show me.
I literally said "any other dog breed." Pit bulls are uniquely capable of killing because of a combination of their bite strength and gameness. I agree that if you have a muzzle on a dog, it becomes incapable of biting. That's cool. I never said "your pit bull is more likely to kill someone than any other dog, even when it has its muzzle on and that other dog doesn't."
So, here’s where I will disagree with you. I admit I had to lookup gameness for a definition. Gameness speaks to their pain threshold and tenacity, but not of viciousness. I’m here to tell you from experience. All dogs over a certain size have a ridiculously high pain threshold. As far as bite force pitbulls aren’t even in the top 10.
But when you get right down to it. It still always comes down to irresponsible owners. Even if what you said was right. If people that owned them took the proper steps to prevent attacks then attacks wouldn’t happen. People should treat their dogs like a loaded gun. Make sure the safety is on in public.
Dog attacks are preventable. It’s not hard. But anyway. Yall have a good night. I’m going to play video games with the woman.
It cannot only come down to irresponsible owners. Like, a baseball bat is just as capable of killing someone as a gun, but it does not only come down to how irresponsible their owners are–an irresponsible baseball bat owner is far less likely to kill someone with their bat than an irresponsible gun owner. People should not have to treat their dogs like a loaded gun. I have never seen someone talk like that about a border collie, or a dalmation, or a golden retriever. I certainly don't see my dad's saint bernard/black lab mix like that.
Again, I don't have anything against specific dogs. I don't think all pit bulls need to die just for being pit bulls. But I also don't see why there needs to be another generation of any breed of dog that needs to be treated like a gun. Get them neutered, enjoy the time you have with them, and then get a mutt in 20 years.
Like, please explain an attack scenario that isn’t an irresponsible owner.
The only one I can think of is a dog roaming wild with no owner. But that’s a city problem.
Kirstie Bernard owned her pit bulls for eight years before they mauled her two young children to death. I would love to see you try to tell her to her face that it was because she was an irresponsible owner.
If she was irresponsible by not having her dogs muzzled at all times when they were with their family, then it sounds like maybe the breed has some problems, because that doesn't happen with any other breed. German shepherds have also mauled children, but that's typically when they're not being supervised. Bennard's dogs were not alone with her children, and the attack didn't happen while they were asleep.
She was irresponsible for not seeing the signs sooner. I guarantee that she ignored warning signs leading up to it. Or, didn’t know what signs to look for. Unfortunately, all we have to go off of is her account, and she isn’t going to admit that she ignored signs of hostility.
When my oldest was born my partner had a dog that she had had for 6 years. It wasn’t a pitbull it was some mutt. But when my oldest was learning to walk the dog would act like he couldn’t see him. He would walk right into my son and knock him down.
That is a bad sign. He had to go. Just because your dog loves you doesn’t mean that it loves strangers, and new kids that weren’t there when the dog first came into the house are the same as strangers to that dog. You have to reevaluate the situation.
But in all seriousness. This has gone on for over 24 hours at this point. I have my own family and dogs to hang out with. You don’t have to take my word for it. After all I’m just some weirdo on the internet speaking from their own experience. For all I know she could be that 1 in a million freak accident.
I hope yall have a happy holidays.
What signs did she miss? How could you possibly know there were signs to miss? If you want to fill in the blanks of the scenario with your own idea of how it went down, then how are we supposed to have a meaningful conversation?
All we have to go off of is her account, and the accounts of so many others who have been mauled by pits. It seems to me that it's easier to explain the multitude of attacks by the breed as a result of the traits that we know that humans bred into them than it is to say that every bad dog owner happens to get a pit bull, and every pit bull that attacks someone happens to have had a bad owner. Other breeds have shitty owners too, and only one breed tops every chart in violence.
Well, just like you said. I cant argue that she did miss signs. Just like you cant argue that she didn’t miss signs. You can say that the high number of attacks means something. I can say that my personal experience means something.
But in the end we’re both full of shit. Without having controlled studies we’re re just doing the best we can with the information we have. Truthfully, and with all due respect probably none of the people here are qualified to actually contribute anything meaningful to the conversation.
Plus, this topic has been ongoing for me, for over 24 hours. If you don’t like a breed of dog that’s your prerogative. As an American I support your right to dislike a breed of dog. But I am going to spend the rest of my evening hanging out with my family building a ginger bread house then playing some more Baldur’s Gate 3.
One more time. I wish you a happy holiday. I hope this coming year is everything you hoped it would be and more.
Sorry I didn’t actually take on what you were talking about in regards to some breeds being more dangerous. If we’re talking size small dogs are less dangerous, but once you get over a certain size, any dog is dangerous.
The problem is that pitbulls do more attacks. But is that due to the breed, or is it a situation where they are put in a position to attack people more. I tried and failed to talk about this yesterday. But here and in a lot of poor communities people buy a few pitbulls and put them outside their house for protection. These dogs are not socialized and aren’t pets like you and I think of them. These same irresponsible owners don’t secure their dogs very well so they get loose a lot.
Why do these people buy pitbulls? Because they have a reputation and they are CHEAP. My local humane society had to start checking up on pitbulls they adopted out because this was such a problem.
My point is that without having knowledge of all the attack incidents. The only thing I can infer is that a lot of people have pitbulls that shouldn’t.
Nah, pit bulls in particular are highly capable of mauling people and other dogs and children and babies. You people all sound like idiot parents whose idiot children act out at school. Youre in denial saying "my little billy would never rip the face off of another child he's an angel!". I bet he can be a great dog day to day, but one day that switch is gonna flip
What the actual hell are you talking about. My dog very well might kill someone if I let it. I literally just got done typing that. I am under no illusion that he is safe around anyone other than the people that live under my roof. That is unless I take the proper precautions. Once again proper precautions mean a full face muzzle and pinch collar. That also means having your dog leashed in public at all times.
However, and this may be where you are confused. It’s a cultural thing here. People where I live take their homestead SERIOUSLY. There is a procedure to knocking on doors uninvited here. You knock/ring doorbell then you walk back out into the yard. Don’t stand on the porch.
Now some of these things may or may not be true, but you should always assume all are true. When you knock on that door you should assume that you’re going to hear an angry dog. You should assume that the door will only open as far as the chain will allow. You should also assume that the person behind that door has a gun in arms reach. If none of those things happen great, but better to be safe than sorry.
People around here are wary of strangers. I trust my dog not to bite me or mine. I don’t trust him to not bite you or yours, but as long as you don’t come in my house when I’m not here. You have nothing to worry about.
With that being said. I don’t want my dog to like you. There is literally no reason for anyone other than my family to be in my house.
Man you’d really lose your shit if you knew what I did to people that call me uninvited. Ya know, scammers, bill collectors, and stuff like that. I don’t get many of those now. I think it becomes a legal issue within the company.
Cool man
You may feel this way, but it is objectively not true. Police, EMTs, and firefighters might all find themselves with the legal jurisdiction to enter your home, and having an attack dog just leads to liability for you should that happen.
If you are arguing that your dog is a weapon that will protect your house, you're acknowledging the potential for your dog to use violence against someone without your direction. This means that you're leaving the dog, who has no understanding of the legal limits of self defense and defense of property, with making the decision on whether or not to use lethal force.
It is not surprising, given that this is apparently the philosophy of many pitbull owners, that so many maulings occur, since it literally just takes one instance of the dog feeling sufficiently aggravated to lead to an attack, and this is somehow treated as a feature and not a defect.
Bro I just read the first paragraph. So, I’m going to stop you right there. We don’t call 911 in my house, and before you say “but what if…”. We don’t call 911 in my house. Cops would have to have a warrant. Back in my crazy days. I drug a dying woman out of my house. I put her in my car and drove her to the emergency room just so I didn’t have to call 911. I don’t call 911.
NO ONE belongs in my house without a warrant. If someone has a warrant then I have bigger problems than my dog. See I explained all this in a post here that got deleted yesterday for being off topic. People down here are weird about their homestead. I think it’s a cultural thing. But kids are given a pass teenagers get threatened when walking through peoples property. Adults may get shot. You don’t go on another person’s property down here without a good excuse.
But I’m going to tell you like I told the other guy. This has dragged on for over 24 hours now. I’m going to go hang out with my family. I have a gingerbread house to build, and baldurs gate 3 to finish. I hope you have a happy holiday.
Umm, we definitely don't need a muzzle for the family labs when in public. That absolutely says something about the breed.
I'm glad you're happy with your dog and work hard to keep it happy and peaceful, but that simply does not change the fact that it is an inherently dangerous breed (that has been intentionally bred for aggression).
Btw, I absolutely think that a dog's owner bears full responsibility for them. But that doesn't mean it's a safe breed we should be promoting, either.
Labs are in the top 10 for most bites and deaths according to to this website. Sooooo…
https://topdogtips.com/statistics-on-dog-bites/
And THIS is why pit types overflow the shelters and cause the vast majority of injuries. The delusion in pit owners is tangible.
Just because the dog is sweet with you and your family, doesn't make it sweet or safe. Nor does it mean it will stay that way if circumstances align badly. There are hundreds of dog breeds who are either genuinely sweet in all circumstances, or unable to cause serious damage if they aren't sweet.
People are getting on your case because your comments are full of cognitive dissonance. You say it's irresponsible owners, while somehow missing the evidence that you defending the sweetness of a dog that is clearly aggressive in public makes you one of the irresponsible owners.
Sure, muzzling your dog is a modicum of self- awareness, but these dogs simply shouldn't be around nearly as much as they are. People going on the internet and touting their sweetness is encouraging irresponsible people to breed, buy, and adopt them.
I have a fucking standard poodle that works on the same rules. It's not a pit thing, it's a dog thing
Good for you. That doesn't change the statistics, so I'm not sure why you think your comment is relevant.
The problem is people, not any particular breed. Any large breed can be dangerous if trained to be. That pits statistically bite more is just a function of human culture, not anything innate in the breed.
"Any large breed can be dangerous if trained to be" is vastly different from "this breed is dangerous unless trained not to be, and even then, it's iffy."
Anyone who thinks that a breed of dogs bred specifically for fighting has no innate traits for fighting has no idea what they are talking about.
Pits are bred for fighting other dogs, not people. All large breeds are dangerous if not trained properly. Dogs are apex predators and bringing them into their home doesn't change that.
I'm sure an animal bred to fight makes sure it only fights the four-legged ones. 🙄
Not all large breeds are dangerous in the same way. Trying to pretend they are against all the evidence to the contrary is either disingenuous or ignorant.
Yes, actually. They are bred not to attack people so they don't bite their handlers.
Literally any large breed that has not been neutered or spayed is more likely to cause a serious bite than a neutered or spayed pit bull. You are acting like they are some huge outlier and they are not. There are far more significant factors than breed at play.
Yeah, you really have no idea what you're talking about. That's not how genetics or dogs work. You're also building strawman and I can't be bothered any more.
Keep on showing off your level of understanding if that floats your boat. You're part of the problem.
Facts that contradict your beliefs do not qualify as a straw man. People often turn to insults when proven wrong to protect their egos.
Sorry, but your comment reminded me of this video
https://piped.kavin.rocks/watch?v=k9ZGEvUwSMg
Bro, are you me?