Reply With Quote
I will start this off by saying I don't have an opinion one way or another about pit bulls.
I have to ask, do you really think that you posting an article about a pit bull attack acts as a valid arguement? Do you think that perhaps your search (across the nation) for pit bull attacks is just too broad (of course you are going to find a weekly pit bull attack)? Where is your control (if you searched for reports of other dogs attacking people are you just as likely to find these instances)? Also, because of this reputation don't you think that you are more likely to find articles about pit attacks?
If you want to make this valid, you will have have to conduct a study, or failing that, dig through police reports of every jurisdiction across the country to find reports detailing dog attacks, then tally them up by breed. Then count every owned dog accross the nation and tally them up by breed so you can correct for proportion.
Its like posting a weekly article about someone who is a lotto player winning the lottery, and infering from those articles that all lotto players win the lottery.
I don't know if they are more pre-disposed to attack than other dogs. I do know, however that they are bigger dogs and therefore IF they attack it would seem that they are more likely to cause major damage.
The only dogs I don't like are small dogs, and the only ones I hate are boston terriers (though I could fully hate any small dog if it were put at my house under the same cir stances that the Boston Terrier was). Maybe I should get a pit so that it could use its attack predisposition to swallow the BT whole.
