That sort of misidentification is another reason that dog bite statistics are unreliable; they depend not on rigorous breed identification but on amateurs’ identification based on physical traits shared by bull dogs, mastiffs and terriers. Artificially group dog bite reports involving a dozen unrelated breeds or mixes together under the misidentification “pit bull” and yeah, you make pit bulls sound scary.
Even when properly applied to pit bull type dogs, the term “pit bull” is imprecise because as wikiipedia states “pit bull is an umbrella term for several types of dog believed to have descended from bull and terriers. In the United States, the term is usually considered to include the American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Bully, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and sometimes the American Bulldog, along with any crossbred dog that shares certain physical characteristics with these.”
Anyone who argues that breed is a reliable indicator of violent behavior and refuses to acknowledging the lack of reliability of eye witness breed identification on the basis of appearance is arguing in bad faith.
That illustrates a point though. Pit Bulls tend to get bought by violent owners because of their infamy, which reinforces it and gets more people to recognize them, which yields more taught violence, and so on…
It’s also inherint in Dalmations who are surprisingly aggressive creatures, but people wishing to intimidate won’t be using a Dalmation as their guard dog.
It’s not whataboutism, it’s “there are other factors in play besides the breed of dog” which you completely fail to understand. Yes the breed of dog is naturally aggressive, but other factors also allow the data you present to be skewed.
That absolutely is not what defines a whataboutism. A whataboutism is intended to distract and dodge from the point being made. I addressed your point, which was “This dog breed is incredibly violent, here are stats” and provided logic to state that these stats don’t paint the whole picture, which you’re dodging and are instead throwing around a buzzword that you obviously don’t know the meaning of in an attempt to distract from the argument.
If violent people buy a scary looking, aggressive dog for the purpose of scaring others and doing harm, stats around those dogs doing harm are going to go up. Other dog breeds can be just as violent, but don’t have the same stats to paint that picture simply because they’re not put into the same scenarios. If you’re not understanding this and/or continue to fail to address it, just don’t respond.
[“Many dog advocates argue that there is no such thing as a bad breed, only a bad owner.”
“Pit bulls may present a greater danger than other breeds for many reasons, such as because they have been bred to be more aggressive, are less likely to back down during fights and are less likely to give a warning before a bite.”](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/dog-attack-statistics-breed/)
I don’t know why you brought that discussion up when the dog in the picture is clearly an all-black mastiff…
That sort of misidentification is another reason that dog bite statistics are unreliable; they depend not on rigorous breed identification but on amateurs’ identification based on physical traits shared by bull dogs, mastiffs and terriers. Artificially group dog bite reports involving a dozen unrelated breeds or mixes together under the misidentification “pit bull” and yeah, you make pit bulls sound scary.
Even when properly applied to pit bull type dogs, the term “pit bull” is imprecise because as wikiipedia states “pit bull is an umbrella term for several types of dog believed to have descended from bull and terriers. In the United States, the term is usually considered to include the American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Bully, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and sometimes the American Bulldog, along with any crossbred dog that shares certain physical characteristics with these.”
Anyone who argues that breed is a reliable indicator of violent behavior and refuses to acknowledging the lack of reliability of eye witness breed identification on the basis of appearance is arguing in bad faith.
That illustrates a point though. Pit Bulls tend to get bought by violent owners because of their infamy, which reinforces it and gets more people to recognize them, which yields more taught violence, and so on…
Okay it’s still mastiff
It is not “taught violence”, it is inherent. Educate yourself on dog aggressiveness based on breed.
It’s also inherint in Dalmations who are surprisingly aggressive creatures, but people wishing to intimidate won’t be using a Dalmation as their guard dog.
Whataboutism doesn’t help anyone.
It’s not whataboutism, it’s “there are other factors in play besides the breed of dog” which you completely fail to understand. Yes the breed of dog is naturally aggressive, but other factors also allow the data you present to be skewed.
Yes other factors behind the main point are in fact whataboutism. Thanks for confirming the inadequateness of your “point”.
That absolutely is not what defines a whataboutism. A whataboutism is intended to distract and dodge from the point being made. I addressed your point, which was “This dog breed is incredibly violent, here are stats” and provided logic to state that these stats don’t paint the whole picture, which you’re dodging and are instead throwing around a buzzword that you obviously don’t know the meaning of in an attempt to distract from the argument.
If violent people buy a scary looking, aggressive dog for the purpose of scaring others and doing harm, stats around those dogs doing harm are going to go up. Other dog breeds can be just as violent, but don’t have the same stats to paint that picture simply because they’re not put into the same scenarios. If you’re not understanding this and/or continue to fail to address it, just don’t respond.
[“Many dog advocates argue that there is no such thing as a bad breed, only a bad owner.”
“Pit bulls may present a greater danger than other breeds for many reasons, such as because they have been bred to be more aggressive, are less likely to back down during fights and are less likely to give a warning before a bite.”](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/dog-attack-statistics-breed/)
You’re talking about Dalmatians, I’m talking about Pits, that’s whataboutism.
You may not like it. I may not care what you think.