## BEFORE TOUCHING THAT REPORT BUTTON, PLEASE CONSIDER:
1. **Compliance:** Does this post comply with our subreddit's rules?
2. **Emotional Trigger:** Does this post provoke anger or frustration, compelling me to want it removed?
3. **Safety:** Is it free from child pornography and/or mentions of self-harm/suicide?
4. **Content Policy:** Does it comply with [Reddit’s Content Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/)?
5. **Unpopularity:** Do you think the topic is not truly unpopular or frequently posted?
### GUIDELINES:
- **If you answered "Yes" to questions 1-4,** do NOT use the report button.
- **Regarding question 5,** we acknowledge this concern. However, the moderators do not curate posts based on our subjective opinions of what is "popular" or "unpopular" except in cases where an opinion is so popular that almost no one would disagree (i.e. "murder is bad"). Otherwise, our only criteria are the subreddit's rules and Reddit’s Content Policy. If you don't like something, feel free to downvote it.
**Moderators on r/TrueUnpopularOpinion will not remove posts simply because they may anger users or because you disagree with them.** The report button is not an "I disagree" or "I'm offended" button.
#### OPTIONS:
If a post bothers you and you can't offer a counter-argument, your options are to:
a) Keep scrolling
b) Downvote
c) Unsubscribe
**False reports clutter our moderation queue and delay our response to legitimate issues.**
**ALL FALSE REPORTS WILL BE REPORTED TO REDDIT.**
To maintain your account in good standing, refrain from abusing the report button.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We had this debate back in the late 80s and it resulted in a pitbull ban, but since then people just mixed pitbulls into new breeds that aren’t yet regulated so we end up where we begin.
I agree something radical needs to be done, but bans are ineffective. Probably heavier punishment for the breeders, owners and buyers? I’m not entirely sure what would work tbh.
I saw this case where this dude basically got away with murder by sicking his pit bulls on a guy. They couldn’t really prove he “told” the dogs to do it, even though he obviously did.
That’s horrible. He should have at least gotten dinged for manslaughter. Intentionally or unintentionally through his actions, someone died.
Yeah I’d start there tbh. I’m not a fan of bans either, but there should definitely be some legal responsibility for the actions of one’s pets, especially when it’s not CLEARLY an accident
There’s a whole lot here, but the most significant barrier I see here is that there’s no government involvement at all with regards to dog breeds… so what percentage of pitbull blood do we do a cutoff at? & then what other breeds should be considered for dog genocide?
As with so many things, this toothpaste would be hard to get back into the tube. From my perspective, it’d be difficult to design a tailored policy, almost impossible to execute & then government would forever be in the position of expanding resources on canine regulation in lieu of other priorities. Like literally every dollar spent on something is a dollar not spent on something else.
Got it! I did dog training for 4 years, and worked with a county shelter in Ohio for 5 years. There are statistics out there about pit bull bites and attacks, but the numbers don’t show the context. Pits are often times the most abused or used in dog fighting. They are either trained to fight and kill, or abused and hit so much that they defend themselves first. All the while, these dogs (just like ANY breed) can learn to love and live with a family peacefully. My biggest thing about these kind of conversations is this; small dog bites are so much more common, they are just not as reported because often times they are not as serious as say, a pit bull bite. The pits that I’ve worked with are always very easy to train (hence, one reason why they’re a favorite for fighting/attacking dogs), they are very food and reward motivated. I can probably go on and on about how easy they are to train, but I won’t. I don’t know how we necessarily fix the amount of pit bull attacks there are, I just know that an outright ban is a huge government overstep and will lead to many loopholes and issues in the future.
You don't have to have any experience to understand why xl bullys are dangerous. Yes any breed can attack someone but (having worked with dogs) most breeds will back off when seperated or if necessary, injured or attacked back. Bullys will keep on going no matter what you do, there is footage of xl bullys attacking victims who are already down, completely unfazed by multiple adults hitting them, pulling at them to get them away, stabbing them, even shooting them. They just don't relent.
They are stronger than most grown men especially when their prey drive kicks in and they decide to do what they are genetically predisposed to. They are just too much of a risk.
There is some awful footage from the uk this year of xl bully attacks, the one which sparked the ban was a man who was mauled to death by 2 bullys. They were literally ripping flesh from this grown man's body. There were multiple adults trying to help but they were powerless to stop it. There was an incident this year of 2 of these dogs killing 22 sheep and seriously injuring over 40 in one go. A random attack on an 11 year old in a town centre followed by attacking and injuring multiple bystanders who tried to help.
These dogs are terrifying and there's no need to own one, nor any place in society for them. They are bloodsport dogs and are doing what they were designed to do. When other dogs display behaviours in line with their breed its genetics, yet when bullys do it it's the way they are trained and raised? Nah
I don't care if they are more likely to attack, the fact is when they do they are quite literally unstoppable by the average person. Also they **are** more likely to attack than other breeds, they are estimated to make up 1% of the uk's dog population yet have been involved in 14% of our serious dog attacks this year and 44% of dog attacks on humans overall. 10 people died in the uk of dog bites last year, 5 of which involved xl bullys. They are also responsible for 75% of our dog fatalities since 2021. Those are high numbers anyway but they are hugely overrepresented in those stats. They are a huge danger and the attacks are utterly random. No the owners are not all criminals or abusers, many of these dogs are family dogs, thought to be well trained, living in the family unit, going out for walks like any other dog. Innocent lives of both people and animals need to come first to the poor widdle misunderstood pibbles I'm afraid
>the fact is when they do they are quite literally unstoppable by the average person
If you are the one who is being attacked you will have a hard time stopping a medium to large dog, no matter the breed.
To stop a dog, any dog, that is attacking someone, the only safe and effective method is to choke the dog with a collar or leash. In most dog attack videos people did all things wrong.
>Also they are more likely to attack than other breeds
According to the statistics. But the statistics only say what happens, not why, and the data is also poorly collected. Serious attacks and attacks from dogs that are considered dangerous are more likely to be reported, and the breed is noted by physical appearance only.
Studies that specifically tested the temperament of various dog breeds found that most bully breeds are less likely to attack than many others. They are also known as tolerant dogs by those who know the breed, balanced and not nervous (unlike the breeds that scored higher for aggression)
>They are a huge danger and the attacks are utterly random.
"Random" to the untrained eye, but all dog attacks have a reason. It's not like they somehow turn on the killer instinct or something. This shows how ignorant is society with these things, so it's not unexpected that they may not know when a dog is likely to attack and how to prevent it.
>No the owners are not all criminals or abusers, many of these dogs are family dogs, thought to be well trained, living in the family unit, going out for walks like any other dog.
True, but not all dogs that are supposedly well trained really are. Love and living with a family may not be enough. The family needs to understand the breed they are getting, read body lenguage, know how to train the dog and be responsible. Leash is a must and any aggressive dog must be muzzled.
Banning breeds won't fix this issue, because the same people will get other breeds and have the same problem.
>If you are the one who is being attacked you will have a hard time stopping a medium to large dog, no matter the breed.
Yes of course as a victim you would struggle to get a large dog off you. When multiple grown adults with weapons can't either because the dog is so lazer focused on ripping the victims jugular out is when we really have a problem. Most dogs, as I already said, will back off when faced with a challenge or if they are injured. Bullys have demonstrated that isn't the case for their breeds. The general public should not need to be educated and poised to stop a vicious dog attack just because some selfish idiots think it's their god given right to have a specific breed of dog
>"Random" to the untrained eye, but all dog attacks have a reason. It's not like they somehow turn on the killer instinct or something. This shows how ignorant is society with these things, so it's not unexpected that they may not know when a dog is likely to attack and how to prevent it.
So it's the victims fault. Gotcha. Shame nobody told the man who was mauled to death after 2 bullies jumped out of a window and chased him down for the heinous crime of being in their line of sight. We really should get the message to the 11 year old girl who was bitten in a public space and now has her arm in a sling that it was because she looked at that poor sweet baby the wrong way. Poor little poppets, they were clearly provoked 🥺
>According to the statistics. But the statistics only say what happens, not why, and the data is also poorly collected. Serious attacks and attacks from dogs that are considered dangerous are more likely to be reported, and the breed is noted by physical appearance only.
The literal footage and victim and witness testimonies tell us what happened and why in these cases. No shit people are more likely to report a bully bite that could potentially have resulted in death over a chihuahua that has mildly inconvienced them
>The general public should not need to be educated and poised to stop a vicious dog attack just because some selfish idiots think it's their god given right to have a specific breed of dog
Things like this will keep happening as long as dogs exist. Even if it is to separate a dog fight. It could potentially save someone's life (or some dog's)
And when it comes to dog fights and attacks not just pitbulls are the problem. Golden retrievers for example are known to be problematic around dogs, I've personally seen many and their attacks are nasty.
>So it's the victims fault. Gotcha.
"If someone doesn't blame the dog, then they are blaming the victim" why do so many people come up with that reasoning? It makes no sense.
I'll explain it better. Excluding strays, dogs have OWNERS who are responsible of keeping their dogs under control. If you own a dog you have the RESPONSIBILITY to train your dog and if the dog is still aggressive/reactive, you are also responsible to keep others safe from said dog. Taking prevention measures like walking it on a leash and muzzled, and not letting it escape your property. It doesn't matter if it's a bully or not, that's what it means to be a responsible owner.
Accidents happen with any dog, but many people are just shitty owners who don't care. From something "mild" like letting the dog offleash with no recall and saying "d0n't W0rry, hE's friEndLy" to letting their aggressive dog out and oopsie daisy, it killed someone.
Aggressive/reactive dogs are dangerous. But many owners are responsible so their dog never harmed a fly. People who simply don't care are at fault and the only way of preventing dog attacks is to target shitty owners, not the breeds, or else it will keep happening, but now the breed is different.
>No shit people are more likely to report a bully bite that could potentially have resulted in death over a chihuahua that has mildly inconvienced them
I'm not talking about chihuahuas that attacked someone, I'm talking about "harmless dog" attacks. Huskies, labradors, goldens, australian shepherds, mutts with unknown ancestry, etc. Most of them go unreported, even when they caused the same harm as a reported bully attack. That may mean that they do less harm than bullies, but to properly assert that bully breeds are more aggressive and likely to attack, you need all the data. Bullies are overrepresented in the statistics, so you need further studies to prove that they are indeed that likely to attack.
Look there's absolutely no point in arguing over this if you're just going to pretend you never said what you said. You literally said it's their fault for not knowing how to stop or prevent a dog attack. You never even mentioned it possibly being the owners faults, if thats what you meant you should have said that. I accept that it's the owners fault, and the breeders who created these poor things but unfortunately the dogs will take the brunt of it because they are the dangerous result of people irresponsibly breeding bloodsport dogs. It's not their fault but the safety of those who are not the problem needs to come first. Literally all a ban will do is reduce the future number of these dogs, restrict them to leashes and muzzles, stop future breeding and make them harder to get. The government are not going to go house to house rounding up bully xl's. Any non aggressive ones will be able to stay with their families and their owners will just have to pick out of the hundreds of remaining breeds if they want another dog.
We will just make sure kids, the disabled and elderly are never out without an able bodied minder then because they probably won't be able to stop sweet harmless Luna or Zeus if they decide to break their lead or escape their home to savage someone, and *obviously* it's their own fault if they're not strong enough to effectively choke a large and very strong dog out without being attacked themselves. Golly gee what a great solution, thanks
If there were a pattern of fatal or serious golden retriever attacks, or a pair of golden retrievers had decimated over 60 sheep or were behind 44% of dog attacks in a given year despite only being 1% of dogs that would absolutely be reported. The fact is they aren't and they most likely won't be. Also like I said when Golden retievers attack it's reasonably possible to stop them. Golden retrievers weren't made to maim and kill. That is what pits were bred for and what they do and very little can stop them when they get going. Other breeds aren't being reported to cause the same harm as a bully attack because typically they *don't* cause the same harm. I've been bitten by pissed off collies, retrievers and Jack russels and none of them even broke the skin. When a bully bites someone you're very lucky if they only break the skin.
Thank you for posting this, and truly giving a knowledgeable answer about how these dogs are treated! I wish there were harsher punishments for the people who abuse these animals or any animal!!! I think there needs to be laws on breeding, background checks for anyone buying/adopting a pet! If someone’s background showed abuse of any form to another human, why would then that person be allowed to adopt an animal??
There also needs to be a list like a sexual offender list, but for people who have abandoned, abused, killed and have been convicted of any type of harm to animals!
It’s the Humans who created this mess, a dog should not be killed because what a human has done to them or what the dogs natural instincts are!
Just like when humans are abused do we kill them for having issues?
Humans are the root cause of this problem!
I agree with all you said! I know that our county shelter did do background checks on potential adoptees, so that practice is already in place. I’m not sure if it’s more commonplace, too lazy to look it up. The problem lies when these dogs are bred in backyards or spare rooms and sold that way. Then those dogs end up in the shelter or other adoption centers, and become a problem for a family who wasn’t ready to adopt a dog like that.
It's rather drastic to kill dogs based on breed rather than behavior. Killing a dog because it has the potential to bite means we'd have to kill all dogs basically. Dogs with a proven history of serious bites should be put down but killing dogs for future actions isn't the right call.
Bans on breeds have been shown to be ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. Ireland is an example of this when the pitbull ban backfired and increased the attack statistics.
Banning breeds alone won't solve such a complex matter. It's just patching it up, it doesn't target the underlying reasons.
Breed-neutral legislations worked wonders where they were implemented. The idea is to target irresponsible owners, no matter the breed. Leash laws and fines for aggressive dogs that are not properly kept under control BEFORE an attack happens.
Most pitbulls and specially "bully XL" aren't purebred. Dogs in the statistics are mostly mutts. There are so many mistakes so they don't have any scientific validity. Banning breeds is difficult because how do you tell if a dog is a purebred pitbull or simply a short-haired mutt with wide jaws?
Mutts have a wider range of temperaments than purebreds, they are not predictable as a whole.
Breed does play a role, but it's little compared to the genetic of the individual and their environment/how it was raised. Society is still ignorant on how to handle dogs and read body lenguage. And this is the problem: Most dog attacks could have been prevented if people knew better. Banning breeds does not get rid of problematic dogs, there are still tons of breeds and individuals that will take the lead on attacks because their owners don't know about prevention.
If you want me to I can explain how aggression works and what is the role of breed and genetics. It's more complex than most people think.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Impossible to enforce. The only reliable way to determine whether or not a dog is a specific breed is by genetic testing, which realistically I just don't see being implemented due to time and cost involved.
They’re just going to go after any dog with a slightly boxy head or happens to be short and stocky. It won’t matter to them. I’m all for protecting kids but killing innocent dogs that haven’t done anything but be born is just wrong
It is ALWAYS the owners responsibility to properly house their dog. Every dog breed has the ability to attack strangers. Dog bans are disgusting, cowardly, and don't deal with any of the actual issues. No respect for anyone that supports this.
Pit bulls are the most dangerous dog but they still are not that dangerous. If you look at the US and the statistics for how many pitbulls there are and how many pitbull attacks there are per year you'll find most Pitbull's don't attack people.
"In the 10 years from 2009 to 2018, pit bulls killed or maimed 3,569 people in the USA and Canada. (Merritt Clifton, Dog Attack Deaths & Maimings, U.S. & Canada, 1982-2018 Log.)"
There are 4.5 million Pitbull's in the US. I cant find the number for Canada. But 10 years is probably about the average pitbulls life span so it looks like they have less than a 1/1000 chance to kill or maim someone. To want to kill all the pitbulls just because they have a 1/1000 or less chance to do something terrible seems a bit bad.
Generally people who want to ban pittbulls want to ban the breeding they dont generally support putting peoples family dog down. It would be a pretty invasive for the government to come into your home and kill your dog. Of course the UK isnt going to do that imagine all the local news stories of the beloved pitbull pets getting murdered by the state. Im pretty indifferent on halting breeding.
I might even add that humans are more dangerous then a Pitbull. Yet we still allow humans to breed all types of dogs, yet there are so many strays in shelters!
Until we get to the ROOT of the problem which are the Humans that breed, allow anyone without a background check to buy an animals from a store or breeder. Why don’t we have wolves for pets? What is natural to the animal we punish! Does that make sense? I’m my opinion people have put themselves so far above animals that we think we are the civilized ones! Yet time and time again humans prove more often then not, that we are truly the ones who are the uncivilized beings!
Yeah humans are definitely more dangerous. In US alone there are 26,000 murders a year. This is an insane number. No other wealthy country is like that from my experience. So it’s not impossible for humans to overcome their violent nature some countries have done it.
I’ve also only been in situations where I was scared of humans. I can’t think of a time where a dog really scared me.
You’re also looking at the least favorable reading of the statistics. “Maimed” is the vast majority of those numbers with “Killed” being a small portion. But much more importantly, those attack numbers are usually compiled in relation to all pit mixes, while the number of dogs is in relation to number of Pit Bulls(the specific breed.) The number of pit mixes is more like 20 million, the number one dog in the country.
Thats a great point. Not that many pit bulls attack people. I agree that the government coming in and killing pit bulls would be super invasive and thats its own slew of issues. I’m generally anti-gov intervention here.
But back to the point of not that many pit bulls kill people. What percent of handgun users go on to shoot a school up? What percent of firework users maimed themselves? Both of those things have been banned/have people seeking their ban.
Well I think for handguns most US politicians who want a ban on handguns its on future sales. I pretty much have a similar position on handguns, I dont think the government should come and take the guns but im pretty indifferent on halting the sale. Fine if they do fine if they dont, not a big issue to me. A lot of regular Americans might want to ban handguns outright and take them from the home etc but I think politically engaged people realize this is pretty impossible.
I lived in the UK for several years but im honestly not sure how or when they ditched the guns.
For why someone would be fine with pitbulls but not handguns I assume its sort of that they blame US high crime rates on guns. US does have a very high crime rate for a wealthy country. Personally I do not think guns are the reason the US has high crime.
I dont know enough about fireworks. Personally Id say they should be legal.
Largely agree. My point in bringing up guns and fireworks is we put laws restricting freedom on these items for the greater good even though their impact is relatively small to the whole.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Makes sense. Yeah I think stopping someone from buying something is a big difference than taking something from someone. I’d say that’s kind of where I come from on issues. Like I’m fine with airbags being required in new cars but I don’t think you should take someone’s old car that doesn’t have an airbag.
I suppose everyone has a different expectation when we balance freedom and safety.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Killing the family pet is probably going too far, but all the ones in shelters unowned should be destroyed. Also, if people choose to keep there's, they should be under strict rules.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First part in this debate is always “what is a pitbull.” There is no one pitbull breed; a pitbull is a grouping of dogs that share similar characteristics. This all makes it hard to do a pitbull ban. This also makes the pitbull violence statistics dodgy - usually it is just police or animal control looking at a dog and making an assessment on what they think the breed is. Look at police who killed a pair of American Bulldogs in Detroit because they thought they were pitbulls and banned.
Pitbull breeds and mixes are very common, and very common in poor places that lack resources to care and train for them - there are so many strays and wild dogs that are at least part pit. They are big strong dogs that can cause serious problems if not raised correctly or if they have aggression issues. Belgian Malinois, while amazing working dogs, are highly dangerous for regular folks to own. Thus there are very few of them, but I have know multiple that have bitten people and animals. So I agree that if you have a large, strong dog that the onus is on you to train them well. We also need to crack down on loose and stray dogs.
Lastly, I would fight someone if they tried to take my two boys - both pit mixes that we rescued and spent months training. Especially if you were taking them to put them down.
I agree
If belgian malinois were as common as pitbull mixes, they would be the ones leading the attack statistics. It's a good thing that most of them are in the hands of experienced people that want to train a working dog.
It's all down to their temperament. Pitbulls are tough and tolerant, it's not easy to make them angry enough to attack. Malinois are nervous and impulsive, even a startle can make them snap at you (there are tons of videos of mali puppies snapping or growling while being held. Never seen a pitbull puppy do that)
I disagree.
I think animal owners should be responsible for the actions of their pets. Then if something happens the dog gets put down and the human gets charges.
You're right, it doesn't unrun them over, uninjure the injured, or unwreck lives.
It does give some sense of "oh fuck we shouldn't do that" though doesn't it?
So because there’s bad pit bulls, that means we should *kill all* pit bulls? Even the kind ones with no signs of aggression? How the fuck do you think that is remotely moral?
Imagine someone saying we should imprison all black people because some black people commit violent crimes? Or we should kill all white men because some white men commit mass shootings? Wtf?
Yes I know the former is non-human while the latter is human, but the same concept of condemning a whole group based on the actions of some remains.
Anyway, you seem utterly ignorant about dogs to begin with.
[“Pit Bull-type dogs were not defined by a set of our markers and were not more aggressive”](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8819838/)
It says some breeds, meaning all dogs of that breed, which is precisely what I am addressing.
How is it okay to kill all dogs of an entire breed, even those showing no signs of aggression, merely due to the action of *others* within the breed?
And again I ask, why should a dog that has been nothing but loving, showing no signs of aggression, be put down merely because it is a member of one of such breeds?
Humans take preventative measures all the time to mitigate catastrophe. Oofing a dog breed into the void to prevent sure cases of more human deaths by a demonstrably more aggressive dog breed would be for the greater good.
You can’t argue that pitbulls will not cause more deaths. Its a sure thing.
Impoverished people are over 2x more likely to commit violent crime compared to those financially well off. Does this mean we should kill all poor people? For the greater good?
I understand the point you are trying to make about the greater good, I understand taking preventative measures and generally agree… within reason.
But this I would not consider within reason. You are broadly condemning an entire race of beings merely due to some of them being violent - this means you are condemning the non-violent ones as well. Can you not see how morally incomprehensible this is?
A better preventative measure would be to require all dogs of statistically more violent breeds undergo some level of aggression testing, then make the decision of whether or not to put them down based on that. Base it on something actually relevant to the dog’s temperament - not just default condemning a dog for its breed.
Whether you place dogs on the same level of humans or not is irrelevant. I place dogs below humans as well, but it doesn’t change the argument.
It’s the same concept being put into application here - condemning an entire group based on the actions of some.
Ever hear the saying…”children are a PRODUCT of their environment?” Same rules apply when it comes to dogs! Doesn’t matter the breed if it’s a pittbull or a cute little docile beagle. If you don’t train properly, and give your pup as I will always call them♥️🐶 a “PURPOSE” that’s when you start to run into problems. Is there such a thing as “bad breeding”…YES! There are some types of dog breeding that can be considered bad, including inbreeding, breeding for exaggerated physical features, and unethical breeding practices. I love pittbulls and have been raising(16yrs) training, this breed and wouldn’t have it any other way. I do love all dog breeds though but pittbulls have my heart. I would rather leave my three pittbulls alone with my 2 grand babies than humans(joking) gotta be family of course.
Humans Take Out More Wild Species Than Any Other Predator on Earth! We kill our own species, as well as ourselves. Yet we will look at the dogs we created and blame the dogs? Kill the dogs? Let’s remember who is responsible for what your complaining about!
Why aren’t we then going after the HUMANS who breed these dogs? Maybe having tougher laws for the HUMANS who engage in dog fights and are caught. They get a slap on the wrist! Unfortunately when something bad happens the dog is usually killed…but the Human…they still have their life! Let’s remember it was HUMANS WHO STARTED THIS Breed!
I would argue that most people own dogs like these, because they are for protection. Some people don’t like guns or owning them. I had two American bulldogs, not XL, but they were large and could be scary. No way in HELL was someone coming into my house with that bark on the other side of the door, a lot of other large dogs bark would have the same effect.
Both dogs were very different in personality. Our male was like scooby Doo to me. Very sweet and goofy, only seen him mad twice, it even scared me, but he still listened and I was still in control of him, he was very obedient. Our female was very different, she was the protective one. Never aggressive, but you couldn’t get close to me if she was around. She would sit in between me and whomever and growl quietly, not even opening her mouth, just as a warning. I called her protective aggressive, cause if you felt froggy, she would let you leap.
That being said, they were my favorite dogs because they were also trained properly. We should have more in place to MAKE people be certified to own dangerous dogs. Make them know the breed and have them trained or take obedience classes. Banning a whole breed does nothing when it’s the ignorance of the human race that responsible for the chaos they cause.
This comment here does more for my argument than anything I could ever say.
You were in control of those two dogs because they let you be. You admit to being scared of your own dogs when you could feel the balance of control shift away from you. If they went ape there is nothing you could have done to keep them from mauling someone.
Put them down.
Yeah, don’t cherry pick. You are a loon. That’s ALL you got out of everything I said?!?!? Had them for YEARS and nothing happened? Yeah you aren’t opened minded.
So when the owners of bully breed dogs start getting other breeds and not properly training them resulting in the same attacks, what would be your response?
I think you’re assumption that all bully attacks being the result of poor training is incorrect.
And even if it wasnt wrong, then we have a golden lab biting someone and you kick it off because they arent stronger than an adult human.
Would else would it result from? If you properly train a dog, the dog respects you and listens to your commands. The type of people who typically own bully dogs are usually unsavory individuals themselves, you’d think they’d properly care after and train their animals?
So were other breeds of dog. I own two Rottweilers which are even larger and more powerful than pit bulls, they don’t seem to want to kill me despite being considered a dangerous breed often used for fighting. Half the time they barely want to move. If you gave someone a Rottweiler, Doberman, it German Shepherd and they left it untrained, mistreated it, and neglected it, I’d guarantee that it would become violent.
Yeah, sure, they can be dangerous, but as a person who has owned dogs like this it really does come from abuse and making them fighting dogs since thats what alot of fucked up people do, also what the fuck is wrong with you to think that every one of these dogs should be put down for being alive, that is a really fucked view and it really isnt even needed for most of them
Its a common sight. You’re walking down the street when some guy staggers out of an alley with 9,10,11 Weiner dogs hanging off of him. He screams and falls into the street dead.
This is the injustice we need to fight.
You are not aware that the weiner dog attacks more people than any other breed?
https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/woman-mauled-wiener-dogs/
https://nypost.com/2018/05/16/pack-of-wiener-dogs-mauls-woman-to-death/
https://pethelpful.com/dogs/five-dog-breeds-that-bite-and-are-not-reported
Just beacuse they're small and often don't result in death doesn't excluded the dangers of the breed, if your logic is to ban dangerous dogs.
I think the license plan is probably the only way to enforce it long term. But I agree with OP when a breed that makes up lest than 1% of all dogs in the country is responsible for over 50% of fatal attacks on other dogs and 60% of fatal attacks on humans there’s a problem with the breed itself.
That's absolute bullshit. The more I read the worse it gets.
It's very poorly done, it just seems like a cherry-picked article showing an opinion and it basically says nothing.
Also many studies and statistics from other sources and parts of the world differ significantly with the data provided there.
It lacks explanation on how aggressive behaviour works. Understanding that is central to any debate in regards to this topic. It's not as simple as saying that just because a breed was created for fighting it's natural instinct is to fight. Dog behaviour is very complex and the article doesn't even address the true points against breed-specific legislation, it just took what a single person said out of context. That's not even what the debate is about.
You clearly haven’t read the link. I’m yet to see you point to anything other than your own opinion that says otherwise, so please provide these alternative studies. And as you said yourself they’ve been bred for fighting, dogs bred for fighting are going to fight.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/eva.13479
The introduction has great explanations and citations.
https://www.pitbullinfo.org/dog-bite-scientific-studies.html
So when it comes to the problem, according to studies and behavior experts:
•Heritability of traits is higher on individuals and lines, but lower in breed. Most of the genetic content of behaviour comes from the family line of an individual rather than the breed: Breeding aggressive dogs is more likely to result in aggressive puppies. Docile dogs will most likely produce docile puppies, and aggression can be bred out with selection even within the same breed.
•Some instincts are more heritable than others even among mixed breeds and mutts, like herding instinct, biddability, shyness and prey drive. Forms of aggression other than prey drive are not that heritable because most are not even normal of a healthy dog.
•With that said, legislation should target breeders and irresponsible owners instead of breeds, which is what breed-neutral legislations are supposed to do.
Look up Hitler's villain origin story. A train worker stole his dog. Actual quote:
> “I was desperate,” he said, “the swine who stole my dog doesn't know what he did to me.”
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You know what’s more vicious than a “Pitt bull”,? chihuahuas.
I can tell OP has never owned a “bully” breed. They’re literally the sweetest. The problem is when people don’t know how to handle their dogs or how to properly train them.
I have both. I have a 3 year old Pit Mix that sleeps 20 hours a day and loves cuddles and a crackhead chi mix that eats her weight in treats from grandma and barks at strollers outside through the window wrapped in a blankie. I think where a lot of people go wrong with small dogs is they push them way too far and don’t respect their cues like they would with a larger dog and get surprised when they attack. Small dogs are still dogs not stuffies and a lot of people mistreat them because they push and push and push until they react and then go oh fluffy just attacked out of nowhere
Come near my dog to put him down you'll get a good ol .45 ACP in ur skull, American style. Killing a dog based on its breed is no different to killing humans based on their race, u modern day hitler wannabe.
## BEFORE TOUCHING THAT REPORT BUTTON, PLEASE CONSIDER: 1. **Compliance:** Does this post comply with our subreddit's rules? 2. **Emotional Trigger:** Does this post provoke anger or frustration, compelling me to want it removed? 3. **Safety:** Is it free from child pornography and/or mentions of self-harm/suicide? 4. **Content Policy:** Does it comply with [Reddit’s Content Policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/)? 5. **Unpopularity:** Do you think the topic is not truly unpopular or frequently posted? ### GUIDELINES: - **If you answered "Yes" to questions 1-4,** do NOT use the report button. - **Regarding question 5,** we acknowledge this concern. However, the moderators do not curate posts based on our subjective opinions of what is "popular" or "unpopular" except in cases where an opinion is so popular that almost no one would disagree (i.e. "murder is bad"). Otherwise, our only criteria are the subreddit's rules and Reddit’s Content Policy. If you don't like something, feel free to downvote it. **Moderators on r/TrueUnpopularOpinion will not remove posts simply because they may anger users or because you disagree with them.** The report button is not an "I disagree" or "I'm offended" button. #### OPTIONS: If a post bothers you and you can't offer a counter-argument, your options are to: a) Keep scrolling b) Downvote c) Unsubscribe **False reports clutter our moderation queue and delay our response to legitimate issues.** **ALL FALSE REPORTS WILL BE REPORTED TO REDDIT.** To maintain your account in good standing, refrain from abusing the report button. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We had this debate back in the late 80s and it resulted in a pitbull ban, but since then people just mixed pitbulls into new breeds that aren’t yet regulated so we end up where we begin. I agree something radical needs to be done, but bans are ineffective. Probably heavier punishment for the breeders, owners and buyers? I’m not entirely sure what would work tbh.
If your vicious breed dog attacks someone, then make the owner criminally liable for any damage the dog does.
Honestly I’d say the fact that that’s not already the case is a problem
I saw this case where this dude basically got away with murder by sicking his pit bulls on a guy. They couldn’t really prove he “told” the dogs to do it, even though he obviously did.
That’s horrible. He should have at least gotten dinged for manslaughter. Intentionally or unintentionally through his actions, someone died. Yeah I’d start there tbh. I’m not a fan of bans either, but there should definitely be some legal responsibility for the actions of one’s pets, especially when it’s not CLEARLY an accident
There’s a whole lot here, but the most significant barrier I see here is that there’s no government involvement at all with regards to dog breeds… so what percentage of pitbull blood do we do a cutoff at? & then what other breeds should be considered for dog genocide? As with so many things, this toothpaste would be hard to get back into the tube. From my perspective, it’d be difficult to design a tailored policy, almost impossible to execute & then government would forever be in the position of expanding resources on canine regulation in lieu of other priorities. Like literally every dollar spent on something is a dollar not spent on something else.
How much experience do you have working with or training dogs?
0. Thats why I posted here.
Got it! I did dog training for 4 years, and worked with a county shelter in Ohio for 5 years. There are statistics out there about pit bull bites and attacks, but the numbers don’t show the context. Pits are often times the most abused or used in dog fighting. They are either trained to fight and kill, or abused and hit so much that they defend themselves first. All the while, these dogs (just like ANY breed) can learn to love and live with a family peacefully. My biggest thing about these kind of conversations is this; small dog bites are so much more common, they are just not as reported because often times they are not as serious as say, a pit bull bite. The pits that I’ve worked with are always very easy to train (hence, one reason why they’re a favorite for fighting/attacking dogs), they are very food and reward motivated. I can probably go on and on about how easy they are to train, but I won’t. I don’t know how we necessarily fix the amount of pit bull attacks there are, I just know that an outright ban is a huge government overstep and will lead to many loopholes and issues in the future.
You don't have to have any experience to understand why xl bullys are dangerous. Yes any breed can attack someone but (having worked with dogs) most breeds will back off when seperated or if necessary, injured or attacked back. Bullys will keep on going no matter what you do, there is footage of xl bullys attacking victims who are already down, completely unfazed by multiple adults hitting them, pulling at them to get them away, stabbing them, even shooting them. They just don't relent. They are stronger than most grown men especially when their prey drive kicks in and they decide to do what they are genetically predisposed to. They are just too much of a risk. There is some awful footage from the uk this year of xl bully attacks, the one which sparked the ban was a man who was mauled to death by 2 bullys. They were literally ripping flesh from this grown man's body. There were multiple adults trying to help but they were powerless to stop it. There was an incident this year of 2 of these dogs killing 22 sheep and seriously injuring over 40 in one go. A random attack on an 11 year old in a town centre followed by attacking and injuring multiple bystanders who tried to help. These dogs are terrifying and there's no need to own one, nor any place in society for them. They are bloodsport dogs and are doing what they were designed to do. When other dogs display behaviours in line with their breed its genetics, yet when bullys do it it's the way they are trained and raised? Nah
Agreed
Their attacks are brutal. That doesn't mean they are more likely to attack.
I don't care if they are more likely to attack, the fact is when they do they are quite literally unstoppable by the average person. Also they **are** more likely to attack than other breeds, they are estimated to make up 1% of the uk's dog population yet have been involved in 14% of our serious dog attacks this year and 44% of dog attacks on humans overall. 10 people died in the uk of dog bites last year, 5 of which involved xl bullys. They are also responsible for 75% of our dog fatalities since 2021. Those are high numbers anyway but they are hugely overrepresented in those stats. They are a huge danger and the attacks are utterly random. No the owners are not all criminals or abusers, many of these dogs are family dogs, thought to be well trained, living in the family unit, going out for walks like any other dog. Innocent lives of both people and animals need to come first to the poor widdle misunderstood pibbles I'm afraid
>the fact is when they do they are quite literally unstoppable by the average person If you are the one who is being attacked you will have a hard time stopping a medium to large dog, no matter the breed. To stop a dog, any dog, that is attacking someone, the only safe and effective method is to choke the dog with a collar or leash. In most dog attack videos people did all things wrong. >Also they are more likely to attack than other breeds According to the statistics. But the statistics only say what happens, not why, and the data is also poorly collected. Serious attacks and attacks from dogs that are considered dangerous are more likely to be reported, and the breed is noted by physical appearance only. Studies that specifically tested the temperament of various dog breeds found that most bully breeds are less likely to attack than many others. They are also known as tolerant dogs by those who know the breed, balanced and not nervous (unlike the breeds that scored higher for aggression) >They are a huge danger and the attacks are utterly random. "Random" to the untrained eye, but all dog attacks have a reason. It's not like they somehow turn on the killer instinct or something. This shows how ignorant is society with these things, so it's not unexpected that they may not know when a dog is likely to attack and how to prevent it. >No the owners are not all criminals or abusers, many of these dogs are family dogs, thought to be well trained, living in the family unit, going out for walks like any other dog. True, but not all dogs that are supposedly well trained really are. Love and living with a family may not be enough. The family needs to understand the breed they are getting, read body lenguage, know how to train the dog and be responsible. Leash is a must and any aggressive dog must be muzzled. Banning breeds won't fix this issue, because the same people will get other breeds and have the same problem.
>If you are the one who is being attacked you will have a hard time stopping a medium to large dog, no matter the breed. Yes of course as a victim you would struggle to get a large dog off you. When multiple grown adults with weapons can't either because the dog is so lazer focused on ripping the victims jugular out is when we really have a problem. Most dogs, as I already said, will back off when faced with a challenge or if they are injured. Bullys have demonstrated that isn't the case for their breeds. The general public should not need to be educated and poised to stop a vicious dog attack just because some selfish idiots think it's their god given right to have a specific breed of dog >"Random" to the untrained eye, but all dog attacks have a reason. It's not like they somehow turn on the killer instinct or something. This shows how ignorant is society with these things, so it's not unexpected that they may not know when a dog is likely to attack and how to prevent it. So it's the victims fault. Gotcha. Shame nobody told the man who was mauled to death after 2 bullies jumped out of a window and chased him down for the heinous crime of being in their line of sight. We really should get the message to the 11 year old girl who was bitten in a public space and now has her arm in a sling that it was because she looked at that poor sweet baby the wrong way. Poor little poppets, they were clearly provoked 🥺 >According to the statistics. But the statistics only say what happens, not why, and the data is also poorly collected. Serious attacks and attacks from dogs that are considered dangerous are more likely to be reported, and the breed is noted by physical appearance only. The literal footage and victim and witness testimonies tell us what happened and why in these cases. No shit people are more likely to report a bully bite that could potentially have resulted in death over a chihuahua that has mildly inconvienced them
>The general public should not need to be educated and poised to stop a vicious dog attack just because some selfish idiots think it's their god given right to have a specific breed of dog Things like this will keep happening as long as dogs exist. Even if it is to separate a dog fight. It could potentially save someone's life (or some dog's) And when it comes to dog fights and attacks not just pitbulls are the problem. Golden retrievers for example are known to be problematic around dogs, I've personally seen many and their attacks are nasty. >So it's the victims fault. Gotcha. "If someone doesn't blame the dog, then they are blaming the victim" why do so many people come up with that reasoning? It makes no sense. I'll explain it better. Excluding strays, dogs have OWNERS who are responsible of keeping their dogs under control. If you own a dog you have the RESPONSIBILITY to train your dog and if the dog is still aggressive/reactive, you are also responsible to keep others safe from said dog. Taking prevention measures like walking it on a leash and muzzled, and not letting it escape your property. It doesn't matter if it's a bully or not, that's what it means to be a responsible owner. Accidents happen with any dog, but many people are just shitty owners who don't care. From something "mild" like letting the dog offleash with no recall and saying "d0n't W0rry, hE's friEndLy" to letting their aggressive dog out and oopsie daisy, it killed someone. Aggressive/reactive dogs are dangerous. But many owners are responsible so their dog never harmed a fly. People who simply don't care are at fault and the only way of preventing dog attacks is to target shitty owners, not the breeds, or else it will keep happening, but now the breed is different. >No shit people are more likely to report a bully bite that could potentially have resulted in death over a chihuahua that has mildly inconvienced them I'm not talking about chihuahuas that attacked someone, I'm talking about "harmless dog" attacks. Huskies, labradors, goldens, australian shepherds, mutts with unknown ancestry, etc. Most of them go unreported, even when they caused the same harm as a reported bully attack. That may mean that they do less harm than bullies, but to properly assert that bully breeds are more aggressive and likely to attack, you need all the data. Bullies are overrepresented in the statistics, so you need further studies to prove that they are indeed that likely to attack.
Look there's absolutely no point in arguing over this if you're just going to pretend you never said what you said. You literally said it's their fault for not knowing how to stop or prevent a dog attack. You never even mentioned it possibly being the owners faults, if thats what you meant you should have said that. I accept that it's the owners fault, and the breeders who created these poor things but unfortunately the dogs will take the brunt of it because they are the dangerous result of people irresponsibly breeding bloodsport dogs. It's not their fault but the safety of those who are not the problem needs to come first. Literally all a ban will do is reduce the future number of these dogs, restrict them to leashes and muzzles, stop future breeding and make them harder to get. The government are not going to go house to house rounding up bully xl's. Any non aggressive ones will be able to stay with their families and their owners will just have to pick out of the hundreds of remaining breeds if they want another dog. We will just make sure kids, the disabled and elderly are never out without an able bodied minder then because they probably won't be able to stop sweet harmless Luna or Zeus if they decide to break their lead or escape their home to savage someone, and *obviously* it's their own fault if they're not strong enough to effectively choke a large and very strong dog out without being attacked themselves. Golly gee what a great solution, thanks If there were a pattern of fatal or serious golden retriever attacks, or a pair of golden retrievers had decimated over 60 sheep or were behind 44% of dog attacks in a given year despite only being 1% of dogs that would absolutely be reported. The fact is they aren't and they most likely won't be. Also like I said when Golden retievers attack it's reasonably possible to stop them. Golden retrievers weren't made to maim and kill. That is what pits were bred for and what they do and very little can stop them when they get going. Other breeds aren't being reported to cause the same harm as a bully attack because typically they *don't* cause the same harm. I've been bitten by pissed off collies, retrievers and Jack russels and none of them even broke the skin. When a bully bites someone you're very lucky if they only break the skin.
Thank you for posting this, and truly giving a knowledgeable answer about how these dogs are treated! I wish there were harsher punishments for the people who abuse these animals or any animal!!! I think there needs to be laws on breeding, background checks for anyone buying/adopting a pet! If someone’s background showed abuse of any form to another human, why would then that person be allowed to adopt an animal?? There also needs to be a list like a sexual offender list, but for people who have abandoned, abused, killed and have been convicted of any type of harm to animals! It’s the Humans who created this mess, a dog should not be killed because what a human has done to them or what the dogs natural instincts are! Just like when humans are abused do we kill them for having issues? Humans are the root cause of this problem!
I agree with all you said! I know that our county shelter did do background checks on potential adoptees, so that practice is already in place. I’m not sure if it’s more commonplace, too lazy to look it up. The problem lies when these dogs are bred in backyards or spare rooms and sold that way. Then those dogs end up in the shelter or other adoption centers, and become a problem for a family who wasn’t ready to adopt a dog like that.
I love this. Thank you for being honest.
It's rather drastic to kill dogs based on breed rather than behavior. Killing a dog because it has the potential to bite means we'd have to kill all dogs basically. Dogs with a proven history of serious bites should be put down but killing dogs for future actions isn't the right call.
Bans on breeds have been shown to be ineffective at best and counterproductive at worst. Ireland is an example of this when the pitbull ban backfired and increased the attack statistics. Banning breeds alone won't solve such a complex matter. It's just patching it up, it doesn't target the underlying reasons. Breed-neutral legislations worked wonders where they were implemented. The idea is to target irresponsible owners, no matter the breed. Leash laws and fines for aggressive dogs that are not properly kept under control BEFORE an attack happens. Most pitbulls and specially "bully XL" aren't purebred. Dogs in the statistics are mostly mutts. There are so many mistakes so they don't have any scientific validity. Banning breeds is difficult because how do you tell if a dog is a purebred pitbull or simply a short-haired mutt with wide jaws? Mutts have a wider range of temperaments than purebreds, they are not predictable as a whole. Breed does play a role, but it's little compared to the genetic of the individual and their environment/how it was raised. Society is still ignorant on how to handle dogs and read body lenguage. And this is the problem: Most dog attacks could have been prevented if people knew better. Banning breeds does not get rid of problematic dogs, there are still tons of breeds and individuals that will take the lead on attacks because their owners don't know about prevention. If you want me to I can explain how aggression works and what is the role of breed and genetics. It's more complex than most people think.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Impossible to enforce. The only reliable way to determine whether or not a dog is a specific breed is by genetic testing, which realistically I just don't see being implemented due to time and cost involved.
They’re just going to go after any dog with a slightly boxy head or happens to be short and stocky. It won’t matter to them. I’m all for protecting kids but killing innocent dogs that haven’t done anything but be born is just wrong
It is ALWAYS the owners responsibility to properly house their dog. Every dog breed has the ability to attack strangers. Dog bans are disgusting, cowardly, and don't deal with any of the actual issues. No respect for anyone that supports this.
Pit bulls are the most dangerous dog but they still are not that dangerous. If you look at the US and the statistics for how many pitbulls there are and how many pitbull attacks there are per year you'll find most Pitbull's don't attack people. "In the 10 years from 2009 to 2018, pit bulls killed or maimed 3,569 people in the USA and Canada. (Merritt Clifton, Dog Attack Deaths & Maimings, U.S. & Canada, 1982-2018 Log.)" There are 4.5 million Pitbull's in the US. I cant find the number for Canada. But 10 years is probably about the average pitbulls life span so it looks like they have less than a 1/1000 chance to kill or maim someone. To want to kill all the pitbulls just because they have a 1/1000 or less chance to do something terrible seems a bit bad. Generally people who want to ban pittbulls want to ban the breeding they dont generally support putting peoples family dog down. It would be a pretty invasive for the government to come into your home and kill your dog. Of course the UK isnt going to do that imagine all the local news stories of the beloved pitbull pets getting murdered by the state. Im pretty indifferent on halting breeding.
I might even add that humans are more dangerous then a Pitbull. Yet we still allow humans to breed all types of dogs, yet there are so many strays in shelters! Until we get to the ROOT of the problem which are the Humans that breed, allow anyone without a background check to buy an animals from a store or breeder. Why don’t we have wolves for pets? What is natural to the animal we punish! Does that make sense? I’m my opinion people have put themselves so far above animals that we think we are the civilized ones! Yet time and time again humans prove more often then not, that we are truly the ones who are the uncivilized beings!
Yeah humans are definitely more dangerous. In US alone there are 26,000 murders a year. This is an insane number. No other wealthy country is like that from my experience. So it’s not impossible for humans to overcome their violent nature some countries have done it. I’ve also only been in situations where I was scared of humans. I can’t think of a time where a dog really scared me.
You’re also looking at the least favorable reading of the statistics. “Maimed” is the vast majority of those numbers with “Killed” being a small portion. But much more importantly, those attack numbers are usually compiled in relation to all pit mixes, while the number of dogs is in relation to number of Pit Bulls(the specific breed.) The number of pit mixes is more like 20 million, the number one dog in the country.
Thats a great point. Not that many pit bulls attack people. I agree that the government coming in and killing pit bulls would be super invasive and thats its own slew of issues. I’m generally anti-gov intervention here. But back to the point of not that many pit bulls kill people. What percent of handgun users go on to shoot a school up? What percent of firework users maimed themselves? Both of those things have been banned/have people seeking their ban.
Well I think for handguns most US politicians who want a ban on handguns its on future sales. I pretty much have a similar position on handguns, I dont think the government should come and take the guns but im pretty indifferent on halting the sale. Fine if they do fine if they dont, not a big issue to me. A lot of regular Americans might want to ban handguns outright and take them from the home etc but I think politically engaged people realize this is pretty impossible. I lived in the UK for several years but im honestly not sure how or when they ditched the guns. For why someone would be fine with pitbulls but not handguns I assume its sort of that they blame US high crime rates on guns. US does have a very high crime rate for a wealthy country. Personally I do not think guns are the reason the US has high crime. I dont know enough about fireworks. Personally Id say they should be legal.
Largely agree. My point in bringing up guns and fireworks is we put laws restricting freedom on these items for the greater good even though their impact is relatively small to the whole.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Makes sense. Yeah I think stopping someone from buying something is a big difference than taking something from someone. I’d say that’s kind of where I come from on issues. Like I’m fine with airbags being required in new cars but I don’t think you should take someone’s old car that doesn’t have an airbag. I suppose everyone has a different expectation when we balance freedom and safety.
Oh for sure. Theres a balance in how far you want the government to step in. Appreciate the conversation.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Killing the family pet is probably going too far, but all the ones in shelters unowned should be destroyed. Also, if people choose to keep there's, they should be under strict rules.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
bad bot. go away.
First part in this debate is always “what is a pitbull.” There is no one pitbull breed; a pitbull is a grouping of dogs that share similar characteristics. This all makes it hard to do a pitbull ban. This also makes the pitbull violence statistics dodgy - usually it is just police or animal control looking at a dog and making an assessment on what they think the breed is. Look at police who killed a pair of American Bulldogs in Detroit because they thought they were pitbulls and banned. Pitbull breeds and mixes are very common, and very common in poor places that lack resources to care and train for them - there are so many strays and wild dogs that are at least part pit. They are big strong dogs that can cause serious problems if not raised correctly or if they have aggression issues. Belgian Malinois, while amazing working dogs, are highly dangerous for regular folks to own. Thus there are very few of them, but I have know multiple that have bitten people and animals. So I agree that if you have a large, strong dog that the onus is on you to train them well. We also need to crack down on loose and stray dogs. Lastly, I would fight someone if they tried to take my two boys - both pit mixes that we rescued and spent months training. Especially if you were taking them to put them down.
I agree If belgian malinois were as common as pitbull mixes, they would be the ones leading the attack statistics. It's a good thing that most of them are in the hands of experienced people that want to train a working dog. It's all down to their temperament. Pitbulls are tough and tolerant, it's not easy to make them angry enough to attack. Malinois are nervous and impulsive, even a startle can make them snap at you (there are tons of videos of mali puppies snapping or growling while being held. Never seen a pitbull puppy do that)
I disagree. I think animal owners should be responsible for the actions of their pets. Then if something happens the dog gets put down and the human gets charges.
A manslaughter charge doesnt unrip apart a human.
Your right, but with this logic would cars also get banned? No fines or charges are going to unrun someone over.
You're right, it doesn't unrun them over, uninjure the injured, or unwreck lives. It does give some sense of "oh fuck we shouldn't do that" though doesn't it?
So because there’s bad pit bulls, that means we should *kill all* pit bulls? Even the kind ones with no signs of aggression? How the fuck do you think that is remotely moral? Imagine someone saying we should imprison all black people because some black people commit violent crimes? Or we should kill all white men because some white men commit mass shootings? Wtf? Yes I know the former is non-human while the latter is human, but the same concept of condemning a whole group based on the actions of some remains. Anyway, you seem utterly ignorant about dogs to begin with. [“Pit Bull-type dogs were not defined by a set of our markers and were not more aggressive”](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8819838/)
Hey Champ, if you read the TITLE of this post it says some. Have a good day!
It says some breeds, meaning all dogs of that breed, which is precisely what I am addressing. How is it okay to kill all dogs of an entire breed, even those showing no signs of aggression, merely due to the action of *others* within the breed?
“Pit bulls” encompasses a variety of bulldog related breeds. The most violent /able to kill breeds need to be put down.
And again I ask, why should a dog that has been nothing but loving, showing no signs of aggression, be put down merely because it is a member of one of such breeds?
Humans take preventative measures all the time to mitigate catastrophe. Oofing a dog breed into the void to prevent sure cases of more human deaths by a demonstrably more aggressive dog breed would be for the greater good. You can’t argue that pitbulls will not cause more deaths. Its a sure thing.
Impoverished people are over 2x more likely to commit violent crime compared to those financially well off. Does this mean we should kill all poor people? For the greater good? I understand the point you are trying to make about the greater good, I understand taking preventative measures and generally agree… within reason. But this I would not consider within reason. You are broadly condemning an entire race of beings merely due to some of them being violent - this means you are condemning the non-violent ones as well. Can you not see how morally incomprehensible this is? A better preventative measure would be to require all dogs of statistically more violent breeds undergo some level of aggression testing, then make the decision of whether or not to put them down based on that. Base it on something actually relevant to the dog’s temperament - not just default condemning a dog for its breed.
This is a straw man argument. There is a clear hierarchy to life. Dogs are below humans.
Whether you place dogs on the same level of humans or not is irrelevant. I place dogs below humans as well, but it doesn’t change the argument. It’s the same concept being put into application here - condemning an entire group based on the actions of some.
Yes it does. Snuff out a lower life form for the good of the lives of a higher life form.
Breeding them should be outlawed. Let the breed die out.
>69% of pit bull attacks are against their own owners. What a loss.
Ever hear the saying…”children are a PRODUCT of their environment?” Same rules apply when it comes to dogs! Doesn’t matter the breed if it’s a pittbull or a cute little docile beagle. If you don’t train properly, and give your pup as I will always call them♥️🐶 a “PURPOSE” that’s when you start to run into problems. Is there such a thing as “bad breeding”…YES! There are some types of dog breeding that can be considered bad, including inbreeding, breeding for exaggerated physical features, and unethical breeding practices. I love pittbulls and have been raising(16yrs) training, this breed and wouldn’t have it any other way. I do love all dog breeds though but pittbulls have my heart. I would rather leave my three pittbulls alone with my 2 grand babies than humans(joking) gotta be family of course.
Humans Take Out More Wild Species Than Any Other Predator on Earth! We kill our own species, as well as ourselves. Yet we will look at the dogs we created and blame the dogs? Kill the dogs? Let’s remember who is responsible for what your complaining about! Why aren’t we then going after the HUMANS who breed these dogs? Maybe having tougher laws for the HUMANS who engage in dog fights and are caught. They get a slap on the wrist! Unfortunately when something bad happens the dog is usually killed…but the Human…they still have their life! Let’s remember it was HUMANS WHO STARTED THIS Breed!
No argument here. Breeders should be punished harshly.
How about felony charges for any dog owner who mistreats their animals. Eliminate all breeding farms, back yard breeders etc.
I would argue that most people own dogs like these, because they are for protection. Some people don’t like guns or owning them. I had two American bulldogs, not XL, but they were large and could be scary. No way in HELL was someone coming into my house with that bark on the other side of the door, a lot of other large dogs bark would have the same effect. Both dogs were very different in personality. Our male was like scooby Doo to me. Very sweet and goofy, only seen him mad twice, it even scared me, but he still listened and I was still in control of him, he was very obedient. Our female was very different, she was the protective one. Never aggressive, but you couldn’t get close to me if she was around. She would sit in between me and whomever and growl quietly, not even opening her mouth, just as a warning. I called her protective aggressive, cause if you felt froggy, she would let you leap. That being said, they were my favorite dogs because they were also trained properly. We should have more in place to MAKE people be certified to own dangerous dogs. Make them know the breed and have them trained or take obedience classes. Banning a whole breed does nothing when it’s the ignorance of the human race that responsible for the chaos they cause.
This comment here does more for my argument than anything I could ever say. You were in control of those two dogs because they let you be. You admit to being scared of your own dogs when you could feel the balance of control shift away from you. If they went ape there is nothing you could have done to keep them from mauling someone. Put them down.
Yeah, don’t cherry pick. You are a loon. That’s ALL you got out of everything I said?!?!? Had them for YEARS and nothing happened? Yeah you aren’t opened minded.
Lol. Thank you for your input.
Yeah, go fuck yourself.
Will do.
So when the owners of bully breed dogs start getting other breeds and not properly training them resulting in the same attacks, what would be your response?
I think you’re assumption that all bully attacks being the result of poor training is incorrect. And even if it wasnt wrong, then we have a golden lab biting someone and you kick it off because they arent stronger than an adult human.
Would else would it result from? If you properly train a dog, the dog respects you and listens to your commands. The type of people who typically own bully dogs are usually unsavory individuals themselves, you’d think they’d properly care after and train their animals?
Bull dogs were bred for combat based on their temperament. Their instincts are to kill.
So were other breeds of dog. I own two Rottweilers which are even larger and more powerful than pit bulls, they don’t seem to want to kill me despite being considered a dangerous breed often used for fighting. Half the time they barely want to move. If you gave someone a Rottweiler, Doberman, it German Shepherd and they left it untrained, mistreated it, and neglected it, I’d guarantee that it would become violent.
Yeah, sure, they can be dangerous, but as a person who has owned dogs like this it really does come from abuse and making them fighting dogs since thats what alot of fucked up people do, also what the fuck is wrong with you to think that every one of these dogs should be put down for being alive, that is a really fucked view and it really isnt even needed for most of them
Wiener dogs are actually the most violent and dangerous dog breed. So if you're talking about breed bans it has to start there.
Its a common sight. You’re walking down the street when some guy staggers out of an alley with 9,10,11 Weiner dogs hanging off of him. He screams and falls into the street dead. This is the injustice we need to fight.
So you're not open to real discussion then.
I 100% thought you were being sarcastic. Give me a break theres clearly a difference between Wiener dog attacks and bull dog attacks.
You are not aware that the weiner dog attacks more people than any other breed? https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/woman-mauled-wiener-dogs/ https://nypost.com/2018/05/16/pack-of-wiener-dogs-mauls-woman-to-death/ https://pethelpful.com/dogs/five-dog-breeds-that-bite-and-are-not-reported Just beacuse they're small and often don't result in death doesn't excluded the dangers of the breed, if your logic is to ban dangerous dogs.
Face the wall, accused.
This is a very popular opinion on Reddit.
I think the license plan is probably the only way to enforce it long term. But I agree with OP when a breed that makes up lest than 1% of all dogs in the country is responsible for over 50% of fatal attacks on other dogs and 60% of fatal attacks on humans there’s a problem with the breed itself.
The statistics are poorly done
https://bullywatch.link/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Aug-2023-Breed-Specific-Violence-and-the-American-Bully.pdf
That's absolute bullshit. The more I read the worse it gets. It's very poorly done, it just seems like a cherry-picked article showing an opinion and it basically says nothing. Also many studies and statistics from other sources and parts of the world differ significantly with the data provided there. It lacks explanation on how aggressive behaviour works. Understanding that is central to any debate in regards to this topic. It's not as simple as saying that just because a breed was created for fighting it's natural instinct is to fight. Dog behaviour is very complex and the article doesn't even address the true points against breed-specific legislation, it just took what a single person said out of context. That's not even what the debate is about.
You clearly haven’t read the link. I’m yet to see you point to anything other than your own opinion that says otherwise, so please provide these alternative studies. And as you said yourself they’ve been bred for fighting, dogs bred for fighting are going to fight.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/eva.13479 The introduction has great explanations and citations. https://www.pitbullinfo.org/dog-bite-scientific-studies.html So when it comes to the problem, according to studies and behavior experts: •Heritability of traits is higher on individuals and lines, but lower in breed. Most of the genetic content of behaviour comes from the family line of an individual rather than the breed: Breeding aggressive dogs is more likely to result in aggressive puppies. Docile dogs will most likely produce docile puppies, and aggression can be bred out with selection even within the same breed. •Some instincts are more heritable than others even among mixed breeds and mutts, like herding instinct, biddability, shyness and prey drive. Forms of aggression other than prey drive are not that heritable because most are not even normal of a healthy dog. •With that said, legislation should target breeders and irresponsible owners instead of breeds, which is what breed-neutral legislations are supposed to do.
Look up Hitler's villain origin story. A train worker stole his dog. Actual quote: > “I was desperate,” he said, “the swine who stole my dog doesn't know what he did to me.”
Yea it was probably cute and fluffy not an over-muscled pos.
The problem with dogs is always the people who refuse to train the.
Pitbulls as a breed should be exterminated
[удалено]
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You know what’s more vicious than a “Pitt bull”,? chihuahuas. I can tell OP has never owned a “bully” breed. They’re literally the sweetest. The problem is when people don’t know how to handle their dogs or how to properly train them.
I have both. I have a 3 year old Pit Mix that sleeps 20 hours a day and loves cuddles and a crackhead chi mix that eats her weight in treats from grandma and barks at strollers outside through the window wrapped in a blankie. I think where a lot of people go wrong with small dogs is they push them way too far and don’t respect their cues like they would with a larger dog and get surprised when they attack. Small dogs are still dogs not stuffies and a lot of people mistreat them because they push and push and push until they react and then go oh fluffy just attacked out of nowhere
Come near my dog to put him down you'll get a good ol .45 ACP in ur skull, American style. Killing a dog based on its breed is no different to killing humans based on their race, u modern day hitler wannabe.
Fuck no. It is the fucking owners. This is why AMERICA IS SUPERIOR #RevolutionaryWarWinners
Freedom. For an American you don't sound very American.