How exactly do Pit Bull owners explain this?
Anyway, as unpopular as it is, how exactly do Pit Bull owners explain the number of bite incidents reported in this document?
The document is called:
Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings, U.S. & Canada September
1982 to January 1, 2008
To give you an idea here are some comparative numbers on recorded number of dog attacks on people from the same document:
And now (drum roll please)......
The Winner is: Pit Bulls - total number of reported dog bites in the period between 1982 to 2008:
I'm wondering how exactly Pit Bull owners defend this? A serious question, hopefully people can give objective responses.
There is a persistent allegation by pit bull terrier advocates that pit bulls are over-represented because of misidentifications or because "pit bull" is, according to them, a generic term covering several similar types of dog. However, the frequency of pit bull attacks among these worst-in-10,000 cases is so disproportionate that even if half of the attacks in the pit bull category were misattributed, or even if the pit bull category was split three ways, attacks by pit bulls and their closest relatives would still outnumber attacks by any other breed.
Is it mathematically probable that Pit Bulls are 100 x more popular than all other breeds combined?
If we accept that genetics is responsible for breed behavior, ergo the dog is bred that way, then why does it matter who owns it?
Or, are you advocating the breed temperament be changed to encourage a more dog social, society friendly dog?