General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Pitbulls Used to Be Considered the Perfect "Nanny Dogs" for Children -- [View all]MadHound
(34,179 posts)The sign of somebody who has no facts to stand on, just their own prejudice and bias. Furthermore, you are using wiki as a source, sorry, but it simply isn't acceptable as a reliable source. The reason why? It often gets things wrong. For instance, by my count, your wiki source shows only eighteen deaths from what they term pit bulls. But the number is a bit over twice that, thirty eight. The thing is, many of those deaths are credited not to "pit bulls", a distinct breed, but rather "pit bull-type dogs." There are approximately twenty four breeds, excluding pit bulls, that come under the heading of "pit bull type".
In fact, proper identification of pit bulls is a huge problem when attributing attacks to pit bulls. Here, take the test, see if you can find the pit bull.
But let's say that every single death was due to pit bulls. That puts them on par with deaths inflicted by cattle, which maul, kick, and trample people to death. Thirty eight deaths out of three million pits. And how many people were killed by other humans last year? Perhaps we should start euthing humans as well, just for our own protection.
So let's review, you are using two quite questionable sources. In many cases, the proper breed of dog involved in the death isn't even known. And frankly, you are blowing a number all out of proportion to what is really going on.
In other words, you have nothing.