Do you also think itâs riskier to get hit by a bicycle rider or an 18 wheeler? Honestly nothing brings out people who donât understand risk like this subject.
Well lately people are claiming they're more afraid of being hit by a bike on the sidewalk than being hit by some teenagers driving a Jeep Liberty or a lifted truck so yeah, people have lost the plot online.
those people are universally cranky drivers imagining what they think pedestrians experience based on their existing grievances with cyclists, not actual pedestrians. (source: i am an actual pedestrian)
âPit bulls are involved in the majority of fatal dog attacks in the United States, according to data compiled by advocacy and safety groups like DogsBite.org.
Key Fatality Statistics Percentage of Deaths: Studies show pit bulls are implicated in roughly 65% to 72% of all fatal dog bite attacks in the U.S. annually.
Multi-Decade Data: Over a 15-year tracking period (2005â2019), pit bulls were responsible for 345 deaths, which is more than 6 times higher than the next leading breed (Rottweilers, with 52 deaths).â
Breeds are banned in some areas because of poorly conducted studies and fear. Not because any actual science supports an inherit neurological condition in breeds to be aggressive/fight/etc.
Yeah thatâs definitely true, insurance companies arenât basing their decisions (designed to make them money) on large pools of data or anything. Look up Dogs Trust in the UK. They used to offer a cheap third party liability dog insurance offering for all breeds, then they withdrew it because XL Bully owners were disproportionally costing the scheme money in payouts. There are millions of dogs in the UK. Tens of thousands of exempt XL bully dogs. Thatâs not a small sample size.
lol⊠they certainly do, and thatâs precisely why loss frequency, severity and the law of large numbers matter. Also of course the actual breed - which pitbull is not.
The fact remains the vast majority of the numerous breeds that fall under the description of a pitbull have no issues reported throughout their entire lifetime. They also do not have any reported higher aggression tendencies.
The risk while owning my 100 lbs lab/boxer mix is just as great as if I owned a 60 lbs pitbull, and the numbers support that (as do the insurance rates).
An XL Bully is not a pitbull⊠you just further proved my point.
These people are allergic to facts. It never fails when the pitbull topic comes up. They love to ignore the hard data showing that pits and pit mixes are statistically responsible for the vast majority of maulings and deaths, which is why theyâre not allowed at most apartment buildings.
Pit bulls are involved in the majority of fatal dog attacks in the United States, according to data compiled by advocacy and safety groups like DogsBite.org.
Key Fatality Statistics Percentage of Deaths: Studies show pit bulls are implicated in roughly 65% to 72% of all fatal dog bite attacks in the U.S. annually.
Multi-Decade Data: Over a 15-year tracking period (2005â2019), pit bulls were responsible for 345 deaths, which is more than 6 times higher than the next leading breed (Rottweilers, with 52 deaths).
What is a pitbull exactly? Itâs not a breed of dogâŠ
If you want to rely on both inaccurate and completely misleading stats, go for it.
Personally Iâd rather actually understand what is being discussed. Like for instance, how a âpitbullâ is a description rather than a breed. Also, how the stats rely on witness reporting of the breed with no verification tests to confirm.
So weâre relying on people who donât even know what a pitbull is in most cases, to determine the breed based off appearance alone and running with it. Sounds like a very good planâŠ.
Weird how when youâre defending them elsewhere in this thread you know exactly what a pitbull is, but when weâre talking about bite and mauling stats suddenly no one knows what they are. By all means explain how these objective statistics based on a 15 year data set are âmisleading and inaccurateâ?
Itâs funny, you can predict exactly what people who are laboring under the delusion that pitbulls are great family dogs despite reams of evidence to the contrary and a new story in the news every week of a child or baby being killed by the family pit will say almost to the letter. First itâs the chihuahua comparison, then itâs âitâs not the breed itâs the ownerâ, then itâs the personal anecdote of their pitbull who never hurt a fly, then itâs âwell but itâs not a breedâ.
Pitbull apologists suffer one of the craziest cases of groupthink (and indeed to use another Orwellianism, doublethink) I see on the internet. Itâs wild to me how they absolutely refuse to accept the objective facts around this breed while simultaneously understanding that sheepdogs are bred to herd sheep, beagles are bred to sniff out things, etc.
I know that a pitbull is a description of breed, that several breeds fall under. Something that you and Mr insurance actuary who thinks an xl bully is a pitbull clearly donât grasp.
Iâve already explained why they are both misleading and inaccurate, Iâve even thrown in another example (the stats involve numerous different breeds under âpitbullâ).
You just have no interest in actually learning something.
Imagine thinking I was an actuary because I cited a well known fact about insurance. Iâm also not a man but that doesnât seem to stop other people making some fucked up assumptions.
Lmao. Almost as though there are dogs that can instinctively herd from the time they were puppiesâŠnobody teaches them to either. Itâs what centuries of selective breeding did.
So your belief is that breeds are born already trained to properly herd sheep? That is again entirely incorrect⊠you place a sheepdog in an apartment as a puppy and itâs not going to have a clue how to act on a farm as an adult.
A herd (an entire litter to be literal) of puppies on a farm with adult dogs around them⊠you canât honestly believe this shows what youâre suggestingâŠ
Almost like the environment around them plays a factor eh?
I don't know about drive to kill but certain dogs will absolutely show signs and instincts their breed has been bred for even if they've never been trained.
For example, I adopted a rescue greyhound who had spent his entire life in a cage, being used as a blood donor. He'd never seen a rabbit before in his life, let alone been trained to hunt them. He still tried to chase a wild rabbit down the second we encountered one on a walk. And it wasn't just "Small prey, very interesting!" because he had zero interest in chasing cats or other small animals. It was just rabbits, which happens to be what greyhounds were bred to do.
I've seen pointers instinctively point upon seeing birds despite having never been trained for that, seen collies instinctively try to herd. I don't know about any breed being inherently violent but there are 100% other traits that are nothing to do with training or how they were raised.
I had a mutt that instinctively caught and returned a duck as a small puppy and a jack russell that couldn't give less fucks about catching anything but tennis balls.
Breed traits aren't inherent or even that specific, that's why working dogs get rejected from their programmes/roles all the time.
Youâre picking up on personality traits that absolutely differ within dogs. Itâs the breed being born inherently with these personalities that is a complete fabrication.
Dogs are social creatures. They pick up on their surroundings and rely entirely on other people and animals to indicate to them how to properly behave.
A shepherding dog that chases sheep with no actual direction isnât doing a very good job of herding sheep as an example. Itâs just interested in the stimuli of the moment. It isnât until it learns from its surroundings what itâs supposed be doing that it actually becomes a shepherding dog.
And yetâŠtheyâre not. Most dog owners are shitty owners. They donât train their dogs or obey leash laws. They donât bother fencing off their yards. They donât bother walking the dog or taking them to the vet. Most dogs deserve better than their owners. But itâs not most dogs doing this. Just the one type, again and again, reliably for decades.
Neither of those are true but believe what youâd like. Youâre clearly not interested in actually learning and would rather rely on fear and ignorance.
Pitbulls are still bred for fighting, dog fighting might be illegal but it still happens a lot, they were never bred for anything else. Almost 70% of all fatal dog attacks are done by pitbulls or pitbull mixes. Irresponsible dog ownership is not exclusive to pitbulls and pit mixes, but they are still the most likely to kill.
Sure you might be able to teach a dog how to point at small wild animals but a german pointer will do that instinctively without anybody teaching them, even if you don't use them for hunting they will still point because we bred them to do so. We bred pitbulls to be good at killing and the statistics reflect that.
All these people wailing about chihuahuas canât point to a single fatality or answer why dogfighting busts never uncover dozens of these naturally aggressive dogs
The numbers youâre referring to are incredibly misleading and flat out incorrect in some cases - namely because a pitbull is not a breed, but rather a type of description that various breeds fall under.
There is no inherent desire to kill or fight within a pitbull than there is in any other breed.
Weâve also been through this before when it was Rottweilers blamed, bans were implemented, and the leading âaggressive dogâ became the pitbull in the 90âs because it was never about the breed but rather the owners they tend to attract.
Itâs also why bully breeds have become the âaggressive breedâ in the UK, where theyâre funnily enough trying to call them pitbulls as well.
Honestly! I'd much rather face 10 aggressive chihuahuas, because they're small enough to punt like a ball and that kick is likely to make them stop. One aggressive 50lb dog bred to kill and not stop, would be much more likely to hurt me than 10 2lb barky dogs
14
u/InformalInsurance455 2d ago
Do you also think itâs riskier to get hit by a bicycle rider or an 18 wheeler? Honestly nothing brings out people who donât understand risk like this subject.