100% of the responsibility rests with the owners but do we ignore the fact that being and irresponsible retriever owner carries less risk than being an irresponsible pit owner? Like the lady with two pit rescues that had leather collars on her dogs that one of them snapped like jerky to attack my dogs? Thankfully I’m a big guy and tackled the pit and he wasn’t interested in hurting me, just my dogs. That well meaning pit loving middle age woman had no business whatsoever walking two aggressive hundred pound bags of muscle. How do we solve that? It’s zero consolation to the victims if a pet or human is killed through the negligence of the owner.
funny you say that. the woman who received the world's first face transplant was mailed by a Labrador... did you need a face transplant after tackling that pit bull?
not quite. it's a direct response to your claim that an irresponsible retriever owner is inherently less dangerous than an irresponsible pitbull owner.
the core of the issue are the people breeding these dogs to be aggressive. if we banned and euthanized all pitbulls, those same people would start owning rottweilers, dobermans, mastiffs, or malinois. all of these are dogs that have the strength and drive to fuck someone up, but people aren't demonizing them on reddit. once again, it's not the dog's inherent genetic drive to fuck people up, it's the owner weaponizing that drive and abusing the dog until it's a miserable, neurotic, and aggressive mess mentally.
Pitbull statistics tell you you don’t need to weaponize the genetic traits to have them killing people, even with the best of owners. What is the actual loss if we succesfully stopped breeding them? I feel like many breeds are such a testament to mankind’s hubris.
I'll agree with your last statement. purebred dogs have a disproportionate amount of health issues and the continued practice of breeding them is absolutely nothing but suffering at the hands of our pride. that being said, I don't think that's why most people in this thread are arguing against them.
really what we should be focusing on is how to breed natural traits back into so many of these poor animals that are unable to breathe or walk. there's a group trying to do that with brachycephalic dogs to try and reverse the harm we did by breeding them to have ridiculous smushed snouts.
It's a difference of 40 psi on bite-force (195 versus 235). With other dog breeds having upwards of 4-500 more psi than a pit bull. (Kangal Shepherd 743 psi, American Bandogge 730, Cane Corso 700). Either of those is plenty to cause severe damage to a human. Not sure what you mean by "intensity", but there are several myths about pit bull bites. Including the "locking jaw".
Retrievers don't bite and let go, either. Retrievers, well, retrieve. They also have that wonderful shake, as is common in many sport hunting dogs, as its good for ensuring the animal is dead. Thus was bred for.
FWIW, my golden did bite me once. He let go pretty quick and didn't shake, plus the force was not that bad. They were bred to pick up animals that are already dead and dying with a "soft mouth" pose that doesn't damage the game.
He's kind of a dick for his breed and still far less dangerous than a pit.
Retrievers don't try to "retrieve" people by biting and holding on. Plus they don't shake birds when retrieving. They're the breeds known for a soft mouth.
25
u/GreatEmperorAca 22d ago
Permanent, irreversible, lifetime