The comparison of guns and pit bulls is apt in one way. You need to know what you are doing to handle either one, and there are a lot of people should not have either one.

This is an interesting link. https://www.1800petmeds.com/education/pit-bull-facts-and-myths.htm

I had always suspected the pit bull was popular, but I had no idea there were 6 times as many as there were German Shepherds, but only about 40% more fatal bites. This popularity has not been good for the breed. A lot of disreputable people have gotten into raising them, and it has been pretty devastating. That is the source of your bad wiring. There are many instances in many different breeds where genetic abnormalities are known and almost certainly due to poor choices made by breeders.

It was not so very long they were better known as the nanny dog, like this one is.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1509203530.jpg

What could go wrong?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1509207361.jpg

Pretty much what we have seen in this thread:

Studies show that pit bull owners employ strategies to disguise the true nature of the breed by engaging in distortions, denial and overcompensation and by projecting blame after attacks.

Not normal dog owners

To understand the experience of owning a negatively perceived dog, Tufts Center for Animals and Public Policy did a case study on pit bull owners that was published in 2000. Researchers found that with "outlaw" breeds, such as pit bulls, the human-dog relationship is sociologically more complex than previously known. Owners of pit bulls, they discovered, directly feel the stigma targeted at their breed and resort to various tactics to mitigate it. These strategies included:
"passing their dogs as breeds other than pit bulls, denying that their behavior is biologically determined, debunking adverse media coverage, using humor, emphasizing counter-stereotypical behavior, avoiding stereotypical equipment or accessories, taking preventive measures, or becoming breed ambassadors."

https://www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pit-bull-owners.php

No less of an authority than Time magazine has this to say, and offers the research to back it up:

Pit bulls make up only 6% of the dog population, but they’re responsible for 68% of dog attacks and 52% of dog-related deaths since 1982, according to research compiled by Merritt Clifton, editor of Animals 24-7, an animal-news organization that focuses on humane work and animal-cruelty prevention.

KFC Victoria Wilcher: Why Do So Many Pit Bulls Maul Children? | Time.com

From Live Science:

A five-year review of dog-bite injuries from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, published in 2009 in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, found that almost 51 percent of the attacks were from pit bulls, almost 9 percent were from Rottweilers and 6 percent were from mixes of those two breeds.

In other words, a whopping two-thirds of the hospital's dog-attack injuries involved just two breeds, pit bulls and Rottweilers.

Other studies confirm these statistics: A 15-year study published in 2009 in the American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology revealed that pit bulls, Rottweilers and German shepherds were responsible for the majority of fatal dog attacks in the state of Kentucky.

https://www.livescience.com/27145-are-pit-bulls-dangerous.html

We can do this all day. You can show us "facts" as presented by breed supporters and apologists. I can show you real statistics and studies conducted by neutral parties who do not have "a dog in this fight".

Let's take these stats to a logical conclusion.
-68% of dog attacks come from ONE breed and there are 339 breeds.
-It is estimated that Pit Bulls make up only 6% of all dogs out there.

Therefore either:
a) this breed of dogs is dangerous since 68% of dog attacks come from 6% of all dogs globally or,
b) if (as others claim) it all depends on the people caring for the dog, then the overwhelming majority of pit bull owners are dangerous and unstable since they have created the above stats.

Which one?

please don't give opinion or babble on how your one poopsy is so sweeet... Use the facts. Which one?

You have to be careful with statistics. Studying the statistics of one hospital, or one state, won't really tell you much of anything. A hospital next to a ghetto full of gangbangers is probably going to have different statistics than the one in Palm Beach. Taking that a step further, a study that just focuses on what breed was involved doesn't go far enough to determine if the breed was the causative factor, or some other factor was the cause. Better studies have shown that it's usually the environment and the owners that are the major causative factors. Then you also have to look at how frequently the dog breed is listed incorrectly. The studies I've seen show that the incorrect breed was documented between 35 and 40% of the time.

In the end, it doesn't matter. The criticism of the breed most often comes from people that have never owned one, or that know very little about dogs in general. An issue this polarizing isn't going to get solved. You're not gonna change my mind; I'm not gonna change yours. I'm going to do my part, however small it may be, to make the dog world a better place for all concerned. You can do what you want, or nothing at all.

People think this guy is a pit
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1509235318.jpg

Which one is the pit bull...lol?

https://duhmerica.files.wordpress.co...tbullidiot.jpg

Looks like Baz is saying his answer is
I didn't do the math but it must be something like 98% of Pit Bull owners are violent sociopaths (based on national stats)

Statistics can say whatever the folks that are getting them want them to say. Most folks use statistics to further their point or goal, and with that bias in mind, can shake and bake the stats until they say what they want.

Have you ever noticed that every truck commercial seems to say that their truck has the most powerful motor? which motor, standard motor, optional motor, hp, torque?

Did you know that 98% of all shark on human attacks happen in shallow water near the shore? :eek:

Uh yeah, because probably 99.9% of the humans that go into the water do it at the beach which is shallow and near the shore?

Yeah, I understand all that. Feel free to peruse the results of the study that determined breed was not a causative factor, that I posted a link to, many posts above.

They’re all perfectly sweet, innocent little angels who are sadly misunderstood. Just like Muslims. And like Muslims they’re all just wonderfully non-violent and peaceful... until they’re not.

I was supporting/agreeing with your statement in your post.

I'm sure there are folks that through error or bias come up with stats showing PB as being the spawn of Satan. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are also folks that skew the results the other direction for the same reasons. I know the same sort of thing happens in the two groups that talk about guns. And on top of that, we are all hardwired to like the stuff that proves our ideas and dismiss anything that doesn't. It's hard to trust anything these days including your own mind. hahahah We're probably better off just trusting the dogs!