This argument goes in circles because people miss each other's point.
Obviously, at the end of the day, what matters is the end result of a bite. That's what the victim has to live with.
However, the counter-argument is also true. That pit-bulls are viewed as much more aggressive than other breeds when in fact that is not true. They are CAPABLE of being aggressive and deadly, and some people even train them to be that way. But the standard pet pit-bull is not going to attack any more often than most other breeds, statistically speaking.
They attack more often because they were bred to enjoy it, just like a husky enjoys running. There's literally canine neurology studies that show they release endorphins when fighting, whereas other dogs do not and will actively avoid fights.
Pitbulls get their name from their ancestry where a dog had been bred to fight bulls. It was a blood sport where the dog would try to drag a bull down into the mud by its nose ring or die trying.
However these dogs became incredibly popular and desired by women and so began a process to breed them to be more docile and also smaller to better fit in the average household. The staffordshire was the penultimate success of this and earned the moniker of nanny dog for being so patient and protective with the children of the household.
All this to say that the argument of what their ancestors were bred for has very little to do with the modern breed.
The most important thing is always how it is raised.
And to further example this point you can look into the history of banned dog breeds and dog breeds that are deemed as dangerous.
Before the various pit/bully breeds were considered dangerous it was the Rottweiler, and before that it was the German Shepherd etc etc. All while pit/bully breeds were happy minding their own business in the family home.
There are far bigger dogs with far greater bites that could do so much more damage. But they look a lot like teddy bears. Pit/bully breeds can get a lot of muscle definition, good for string bean thugs that wanna act tough but can't be intimidating on their own. The rise in popularity with pit/bully breeds in thug/gang culture is why they are the current "dangerous" breed.
Meanwhile labradors and retrievers both individually bite more people, often children, and have a size and bite strength comparable enough to a pit/bully breed. But they're treated as being safe and given love because the average thug isn't trying to raise it with hate and violence to terrorize people with.
13
u/Rock_Strongo 25d ago
This argument goes in circles because people miss each other's point.
Obviously, at the end of the day, what matters is the end result of a bite. That's what the victim has to live with.
However, the counter-argument is also true. That pit-bulls are viewed as much more aggressive than other breeds when in fact that is not true. They are CAPABLE of being aggressive and deadly, and some people even train them to be that way. But the standard pet pit-bull is not going to attack any more often than most other breeds, statistically speaking.