# I met a Pit Bull Terrier today..... **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [November 20, 2009, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-met-a-pit-bull-terrier-today/518225 "2009-11-20T00:04:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 116
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-met-a-pit-bull-terrier-today/518225/116 "2009-11-23T18:19:06Z")
> [@NajaNivea](#): > > I’m very interested to know what you imagine makes a dog “prone to attack”. Selective breeding for dogs with tendencies for aggression toward other animals certainly qualifies as making said dog more prone to attack other dogs. Do you dispute that some (more than a few) pit lines have been bred to select for aggression toward other dogs? (Please remeMber: the tendencies of any other breed to be violent toward other animals or people is irrelevant to this question). > [@NajaNivea](#): > > I’m also still waiting for any even… _remotely_ plausible answers to any of the three questions I posed repeatedly. I suspect I’ll be waiting for a long while. The answer could easily be gleaned from what I’ve posted thus far, but if you need me to spell it out for you, here goes: > [@](#): > > -Why is a dog with a breeding history for pit fighting more potentially dangerous to human beings? Does it matter, if the complained behavoir is violence toward other dogs? Remember, that’s what I came in here about. My cite to the incidence of pit violence toward humans was simply offered in response to someone’s statement that twenty incidence of pit misidentification had been reported, where was the eviende of pit violence toward humans. I am fine with my opinion of pits being supported only by their breed’s violent tendency toward other animals. > [@](#): > > -Why does a breeding history for pit fighting make a dog more potentially dangerous than a breeding history for human-targeted aggression? It doesn’t. This is the “there are other (more) dangerous dogs too” argument. It is a very weak (that’s charitable) argument. The greater danger posed by one dog does not lessen the dange rposed by another. > [@](#): > > -If it’s not the pit-fighting breeding history, then why does the dog’s external appearance make it more disproportionately dangerous? This question is moot, but just so you don’t carry on about me not answering your questions, I’ll tell you why. It is the breeding history. The breed’s history of violence toward other animals (a product of its dog-fighting past) at the very least makes it dangerous to other dogs. As stated above, that’s enough. [quote=“NajaNivea, post:112, topic:518225”] It might not seem so on the surface, but the end result of the vilification of a particular breed of dog is that people forget to be cautious about all others. Somehow, people like you imagine that a fluffy, blue-eyed, 50lb husky couldn’t _possibly_ be dangerous. And their own family pet, a cocker spaniel? An adorable, squishy little thing that could _never_ hurt anyone. Hundreds of thousands of kids are physically and emotionally scarred, and a handful die every year because parents think their kids are safe with any dog that’s not a demonic bull breed, that avoiding blocky-headed dogs is the ultimate dog-bite panacea. [QUOTE] This is silly. Moreover, there is no reason why someon can’t be wary of both fighitng dogs and animals in general. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-met-a-pit-bull-terrier-today/518225)._