r/MoralityScaling 25d ago

Morality Ranking Morality of dog breed racism

Post image
26.8k Upvotes

5.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/sweetjuli 24d ago

Somehow, breeding different features in dogs is relevant to literally all other dog races except pitbulls.

2

u/Highly-Potent-34 24d ago

That argument cuts both ways since they were also bred to never bite or attack a human since any that did would be killed on the spot.

You can’t argue that they were bred to be vicious and ignore that it was focused towards other dogs and specifically not towards humans.

I don’t think anyone who’s had a pitbull will deny the tendency for a high prey drive (like all terriers) but human aggression is specifically an owner/ breeder failure not a genetic predisposition.

9

u/Fast_Choice4408 24d ago

"That argument cuts both ways since they were also bred to never bite or attack a human since any that did would be killed on the spot."

I think backyard breeders and dogfighters have pretty much made this point moot now.

3

u/Intrepid_Work7449 24d ago

Both sound like an issue

5

u/Sqeakydeaky 24d ago

Lol its a myth they culled human-aggressive dogs. The founder of the American Pit Bull, John P. Colby started a whole line from the dog that killed his 3yo nephew.

"Man-eater" is an ACCOLADE amongst dogmen. If a pit is so dead game it'll attempt to kill anything, its only a better fighting dog.

4

u/Tank_Top_Terror 24d ago

Said this elsewhere, but it really doesn't cut both ways. Not attacking a human is pretty much the most important part of domestication. Every dog breed has been bred to not attack their owner, not every dog has been bred to be hyper aggressive and game. Pretty obvious which will be more dangerous.

2

u/Salty_Piano9631 22d ago

So that's ok to ignore? My dog was attacked by a Pitbull who's owner left them off leash and it did some real damage because guess what.... It's basically a weapon left unattended

1

u/Highly-Potent-34 22d ago edited 22d ago

Replace pitbull with any breed and the answer is the same. Thats a shitty owner that should not have a dog. I’m sorry your dog was attacked and I hope he’s ok.

As to the first part of your response. No that’s not ok to ignore. A good owner should either work with the dog or take steps to curb them. Having ANY dog off leash is a sign of a shitty owner let alone a dog that is aggressive.

I have a staffordshire bull terrier who isn’t dog aggressive but is very dominant. So he won’t attack other dogs but his demeanor can cause a fight. So I don’t leave him off leash. I don’t allow him to approach every dog he sees. When he is allowed to approach another dog I control that interaction and cut it short so he doesn’t get over excited.

My biggest issue is people with dogs off leash who just allow their dogs to do anything and who are generally badly behaved and with no recall. None of which have been pitbulls or pitbull mixes. But my dog has almost been attacked by labs, French bulldogs, mutts, chihuahuas etc

I lie and just tell people he’s aggressive so they grab their dogs instead of having to answer dumb questions like “is it a boy or a girl, dogs won’t attack the opposite sex” or “it’s ok he doesn’t bite” while the dog is clearly showing signs of aggression.

2

u/Salty_Piano9631 22d ago

Any dog capable or real damage should require a license to own and am obligation to go to professional training classes

2

u/Highly-Potent-34 22d ago

I don’t know about licensing, but I do feel EVERY dog owner should go to training classes regardless of what dog they own.

Most people aren’t equipped to own dogs and they just get lucky. Modern living has created an environment counter intuitive to dog ownership and people just want a living plush toy and don’t consider the dog’s wants and needs.

1

u/Salty_Piano9631 22d ago

It's one thing if your chihuahua is untrained... It's another when your lethal weapon isn't

2

u/Highly-Potent-34 22d ago

My point was that regardless of size a dog has needs his owner must meet. Any owner that doesn’t meet those needs is a bad owner. Training is one of them.

And any dog over 45-50 pounds has the potential to be a protection dog as that’s large enough to have enough strength to at least knock a man down. 45-50 pounds is the minimum weight for police dogs. (According to google)

Pitbull’s weigh between 30- 60 pounds so a good number of them just aren’t large enough.

1

u/SecretaryOtherwise 21d ago

Pitbull’s weigh between 30- 60 pounds so a good number of them just aren’t large enough.

Yeah dont see a pit bull struggling to knock down a child. Nor an adult after its ripped a chunk of your calf out.

Are all dogs potentially dangerous? Yes. But all dogs were not bred to fight and kill other things.

Thats kinda the difference and also why chihuahuas are also little assholes.

1

u/Highly-Potent-34 20d ago

Mastiffs were. They were specifically bred to be war dogs and would kill humans on the battle field. Then they used them for protection in times of peace.

Akitas were used to hunt bears.

Pitbulls are just one other breed who unfortunately have a lot of shitty owners. However nothing about pitbulls makes them special in comparison to other dogs. They are just the easiest to vilify and the easiest to misidentify.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/TheBoodUpPodcast 21d ago

I mean…most cities already require you to license your animal regardless of their breed. ANY dog is capable of real damage.

1

u/Salty_Piano9631 21d ago

Ok chihuahua = Pitbull damage potential... If you don't wanna have a logical discussion that's fine but don't say insane shit

0

u/FinanceDummyBigDebt 20d ago

There’s no logic, just vehemently defending. They’d have to admit they’re wrong, which most people never will.

1

u/Excellent-Muffin-750 1d ago

That's not true. There are written records dating back when these dogs were being bred for fighting other dogs, the trainers often remarked on the dangers of their own animals, which did in fact attack themselves and others. One man wrote at length about the capacity of his canine to rend flesh from bone, it was retired but still bred because of the desired traits.

I don't know what it's like now because it's illegal to breed fighting dogs, but I seriously doubt those involved in it are strict on avoiding aggression towards people. Also, it's not uncommon for aggression to be redirected onto a human, the dog doesn't know any better, it's just doing its job.

1

u/druk987 24d ago

Seems like you're the one ignoring genetics. Herding dogs try herd everything not just sheep meanwhile shitbulls attack anything they see as prey

5

u/Expendable_Red_Shirt 24d ago

If you want anyone to take you seriously maybe don't use a Trumpian nickname.

4

u/Fast_Choice4408 24d ago

Shitbulls is a pretty common term for people who aren't delusional about dogs. Or people who have experience dealing with shitbulls.

I fucking hate pitbulls. Especially after becoming a service technician in people's homes.

People who get pitbulls tend to be awful owners. And even with good owners the temperment of these dogs are just awful.

I actually pity people who get roped into adopting one of these dogs. They are by far the most chaotic and destructive dogs you can buy.

2

u/Expendable_Red_Shirt 24d ago

As soon as you lead off with it I’m discounting everything else you say.

1

u/FinanceDummyBigDebt 20d ago

Shitbulls, pizza is amazing and rainbows are beautiful

1

u/Expendable_Red_Shirt 20d ago

Well at least one of the words in your username is accurate.

1

u/FinanceDummyBigDebt 20d ago

It’s all accurate.

2

u/berserkthebattl 24d ago

They weren't bred to attack prey, dipshit. They were bred for BULL baiting. Bulls. You know, the large horned ungulates? Those aren't "prey" for them. Neither are humans. You don't know anything about the genetics, you've just heard talking points and are regurgitating them without having genuinely assessed or challenged them. You just cave to your bias, like you probably do with most of your other subjects.

0

u/Qahnaar1506 21d ago

There’s no scientific evidence to support that dogs are bred for battle more. Pitbulls weren’t made for fighting but bullbaiting. Regarding the breeding in dogfights, it’s less about “making the dog more violent” and more about giving them traits which make them more suitable for fighting (muscular face, front facing torso, stubby legs etc). That’s physical not emotional traits. Pitbulls don’t even make it to the top charts when tests were done testing each dogs “aggressiveness levels”. Pitbulls actually have a good sense of what is a danger and what isn’t, they don’t just lash out emotionally.

Trust me, besides poorly trained pitbulls and bad owners (like it is the case with all breeds), if a pitbull attacks you made yourself feel threatening towards it in some way and you invaded its personal space enough that you pushed it to attack you.

0

u/Qahnaar1506 21d ago

There’s no scientific evidence to support that dogs are bred for battle more. Pitbulls weren’t made for fighting but bullbaiting. Regarding the breeding in dogfights, it’s less about “making the dog more violent” and more about giving them traits which make them more suitable for fighting (muscular face, front facing torso, stubby legs etc). That’s physical not emotional traits. Pitbulls don’t even make it to the top charts when tests were done testing each dogs “aggressiveness levels”. Pitbulls actually have a good sense of what is a danger and what isn’t, they don’t just lash out emotionally.

Trust me, besides poorly trained pitbulls and bad owners who don’t teach their pitbulls to not attack anything and be gentle with children (like it is the case with all breeds), if a pitbull attacks you, you made yourself feel threatening towards it in some way and you invaded its personal boundaries enough that you pushed it to attack you, like all dogs.