Highlights: In a bizarre turn of events last month, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced that he would ban American XL bullies, a type of pit bull-shaped dog that had recently been implicated in a number of violent and sometimes deadly attacks.

XL bullies are perceived to be dangerous — but is that really rooted in reality?

  • bitsplease
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You are though.

    I’m not, reread my previous comment. Last time I’m going to say this before I just block you without giving you the courtesy of even replying, stop deciding for me what I’m advocating, I’ve laid out the strategy I’d like to see in my previous comment, I’m advocating for absolutely no action beyond that.

    So pitbulls will still breed even if you tell people not to do it.

    Yes, of course - do you actually believe this is where a majority of pitbulls come from though? No moral strategy will completely eliminate the breed, but restricting breeders will mean that your average person can’t get one, which means your average Joe/Jane is far less likely to run into them on the street.

    How do you come up with pitbulls having health and aggression issues?

    I never said they have health issues (maybe they do, I’m not aware of it though) - When I talk about breeds with health issues, I’m referring to breeds like Pugs that live their whole lives in discomfort because of how much we fucked up their physiology.

    In over half of all dog bite cases, the breed is unknown

    True, that’s why we only look at the cases where the breed is known for these discussions, without making any assumptions about the dogs whose breed is unknown.

    It’s not anyone’s job to count dog bites by breed

    I guess true? In that people don’t get paid, they do however report breed information as part of the reporting of the dog bite. And as I’ve said in other comments in this thread, I’m entirely sure that there is a margin of error in the reporting of breeds for dog bites. However, even if you assume as much as a 5x overreporting for pitbulls, that still puts at about double the chance of an individual pitbull biting someone as opposed to a mixed breed dog.

    anyone purporting to have done so is basically lying.

    Ah, the ole “I don’t like it, so it must be made up”, very scientific.

    • They don’t report the breed in over half of all dog bite cases. You’re kidding yourself that the resultant data isn’t worthless. Statistically, there could be another breed of dog you’ve never heard of causing over half of dog related njuries.

      You’re response is:

      that’s why we don’t make any assumptions about the dogs whose breed is unknown.

      Well you may not but “we” do, and we know relying on something that is so underreported, as well as misreported, is not rational. Seems like you realize the data is worthless but you want to ban pitbulls so badly you don’t care. That makes me think that for you it’s about something more than public safety.

      • bitsplease
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That makes me think that for you it’s about something more than public safety.

        Yeah, it’s been clear from your very first comment that you feel this way lol - you’re welcome to disagree with me, but I’ve already laid out my thoughts on the matter multiple times. Unless you have anything new to add, instead of just repeating the same fallacies about the data being “worthless”, then I don’t see any value in continuing to talk in circles