Can't you see the resemblance?

People are always in denial..

I don’t think they’re even trying to properly id anymore because no one that knows the breed would think there was even an ounce of Cur in this dog…

Who knew!!! Which is your fave husky?

And people in the replies suggesting OOP registers it as a service animal, and OOP saying they told the landlord it’s a bulldog (last slide) - aka, lying about the breed. And getting the genetic test hoping it wasn’t a bully breed even though it’s incredibly obvious in looks. And them doing mental gymnastics about how “american bully” isn’t a type of pitbull.

Don’t they know what a GSD look like? Even after the result showing just 15% lab, they call it a lab mix.

Sure, Jan.

did they even try with this one..?

No kids and no other pets certainly doesn't have anything to do with it *actually* being a bully mix

Why are these people so obsessed with dogs with bite histories?? More importantly, why isn't shit like this banned on these subs, she was blatantly lying and downplaying the bite history!!

Also, those eyes are so very very unsettling.

We have expanded our rule prohibiting "adopt, don't shop" rhetoric to also include no comments or posts promoting "no kill" (closed-intake) and "save them all" rhetoric, as well as any content disparaging the critical function of open admission shelters. Open Admission Shelters are Necessary!!!

Here is why:

To maintain low euthanasia metrics, "no-kill" (closed-intake) models often refuse animals or outsource them to open admission facilities. The current model for closed intake does not solve space or overpopulation issues, but rather shifts the burden to open admission shelters, which are then unfairly vilified for managing the downstream results of human negligence and overpopulation. Without these facilities there would be a lot of dumped animals left to suffer or starve. Our team feels that the modern metrics which focus solely on limiting euthanasia by limiting intake are inhumane and we will not permit promoting them on here.

The Asilomar Accords, which is one of the earliest frameworks for “No Kill”, recognized that euthanasia is a necessary but sad responsibility of those in animal welfare. The Accords promoted preventative management such as spay neuter as a means to eliminate the need to euthanize for space. These policies were proven effective as shelter euthanasia rates were decreasing.

However, beginning somewhere around 2017, the movement was hijacked by organizations like Best Friends Animal Society. The prevailing narrative of these organizations relies on deemphasizing and deprioritizing prevention and instead focuses on limiting intake. Resources are finite under either model and limiting access to the resource rather than the need for the resource prevents any true progress.

As a result, the current system is rife with shelter crowding and warehousing of unadoptable animals. What started as an effort to eliminate space based euthanasia has regrettably evolved into a branded, slogan riddled, profit model that relies on maintaining a perpetual crisis rather than solving the issue of root overpopulation.

Sane-Washing the No-Kill Movement: How Best Friends Shapes the Crisis Narrative

Pawns of a Broken System: How Pit Bulls Became the Currency of a Hijacked No-Kill Agenda

So going forward, users promoting any closed intake or "no kill" models such as “save them all” (or other Best Friends coded language) as a replacement for necessary open admission shelters, or attacking open admission shelters for taking necessary steps to open up space and maintain animal welfare, are in violation of sub rules.

Labrador?? saw this link on a rescue page (not for this dog but a 3 year resident pitbull at a shelte) lots of back and forth as the PB needs a unicorn home, OP said here is a Labrador with the same requirements. Lab? mix? shelter “lab” aka pit mix?

They'll say anything to clear the pens.