Teddy (left), and Sampson (right)

  • illi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d love a study on what kind of masters the bloodthirsty dogs have. I’m willing to bet those dogs had masters that encouraged the behavior or got them because the breed is macho and never intended to be responsible about it.

      • Pilferjinx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, pitbulls aren’t dangerous for the occurrence of attacks but because when they do they cause the most damage. Most people don’t report a small dog if they cause no major damage.

      • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This graphic lumps together at least 8 breeds under the umbrella of “pitbull”, which is rather strange. Sure, if you group many breeds into the same category before comparing it to a singular breed it’s going to look bad.

        Also, you need to show per-capita to prove anything here. Sure, the absolute number may be high, but how does that compare to the absolute number of pitbulls? How does that compare to the per-capita of other breeds?

          • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Again, this is why we need per capita instead of an absolute number. We are comparing an umbrella term to something more specific.

            We need data that shows they are more likely than other dog breeds. This does not show that, as we don’t know the percentage chance one pit bull may attack vs any other breed based on this information.

            This is the problem with statistics. If we select the right method, group things the right way, from the right time, and use specific methods we can prove anything we want. That’s why an understanding of how the field works is so important.

            Sorry for the late reply btw, and thank you for continuing this conversation in good faith

            • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sorry for the late reply btw, and thank you for continuing this conversation in good faith.

              All good man. Always happy to have these discussions and it’s nice to find someone willing to engage in good faith rather than anger fueled rantings. Feel free to take as long as you need too.

              In response to your comment. I can agree that data can be twisted to present a false truth, which is why we need to pull from a variety of data points to construct a clearer image of what is happening.

              But with the information at hand it’s my opinion that this specific grouping of dogs makes up the majority of deaths caused yearly (in the US anyways) and even if we were to list each specific dog instead of breed groupings the numbers of fatalities would still show that Pitbulls cause more deaths than any others.

              I also want to state that I am not calling for the extermination of all Pitbulls across the country, I just want laws to ensure that only trained individuals have access to them. All dogs attack, but pit bulls seem to be dangerous as they lock their jaws and never release.

              Again, thanks for engaging me in this discussion. It’s a breath of fresh air here.