Right. So why bring it up?
Uuughhhhh. Giving you the complete benefit of the doubt here, I will explain. Often, a discussion of pit bull aggression will (as it has here) contain a reference by a pit apologist to the aggressive tendencies of [insert another dog breed - often guard dog breeds like Doberman or Rottweiler].* In this very thread, pit apologists have in argument, asked why a pit, bred to be aggressive toward other dogs, is more dangerous than say a guard dog, bred to be aggressive toward people. This is the “there are more dangerous dogs out there” fallacy I was addressing.
*Cite:
My friends have a pit, and he is my favorite dog ever. Sweetest, lovingest, most social dog I have ever known. We will be losing Baron soon to bone cancer, but he is still doing his best to chase horses and play with the other pets. I’ll miss him almost as much as his ‘real’ family.
Just curious, are there any pit apologist who would go so far as to say that pits, as a breed, do not have a higher propensity for violence/aggression toward other dogs? I have answered your posts best I could keep up with them, please return the favor.
Which post was that? (for context.)
78, but it’s not the only example. Before you try to play gotchya, reread the thread.
I don’t see her as arguing that since other dogs are more dangerous then it must follow that the dog in question is not dangerous. I see it as questioning why one should be so concerned about a particular danger when there are worse ones to worry about. Why single out pit bulls?
Sure thing, come on over and let’s chat.
…and just on the remote chance that that you’re not doing so for dramatic effect, you do understand that use of the pejorative “apologist” makes you sound every bit as calm and objective as those users of “pro-abort” “baby killer” nomenclature?
Enough with hijacking the pit party. Let’s take it to the appropriate forum, shall we?
Christian Apologists might take issue with your characterization of the term as pejorative. The word simply means, " one who speaks or writes in defense of someone or something." It is no more a pejorative than the word “advocate.”
Not a pit, but frequently plays one 
His best pal is a hyper-speed little pit bull bitch named Powder, favorite game: Meathead Mud Wrestling 
whole bean: sorry, but not taking your bait. Feel free to comment in the appropriate thread, though!
there’s not bait to take. you don’t or didn’t know what apologist means. that’s cool.
There is no connotation to be had until it is coupled with something. When that thing is loathesome (like Naziism or canibalism) , then the connotation is also, but only then and not until then. The word has a meaning and by itslef that meaning is value neutral.
Yeah - I definitely would have guessed he’s a Pit. I bet everyone who gets their face eaten off by him do so as well, right?
Neither of those have negative definitions either, what you’re apparently not understanding is that in standard practice apologist means “avid defender of something despite it being generally accepted as crap, BS or otherwise discredited junk. Also, a minority opinion.”
Pit Bull “apologists” aren’t “apologists” arguing for the minority opinion or arguing for something that’s been generally discredited (like, for instance, Christian Science Apologists) or is a minority opinion (like, say, Christian Science). They argue for the (admittedly silent) majority who typically believes that banning things based on feel good legislation is ridiculous, and that laws should be based in reality and science, not warm and fuzzies.
Seriously, you have stop making stuff up. That’s not the definition of the word and I have never seen it used in that context by an educated speaker or writer. Pit bulls are unpopular. Pit bull apologists defend them. That’s what this word means. Walk away, you’re wrong.
It’s funny… nothing illustrates the deep and fundamental misconceptions carried by the general public faster than walking around with a hunting dog that frequently gets called a “monster pit bull”, yet fits the “profile” only by half.
I swear, to the general public, absolutely anything with a close coat and a broad skull is a pit or a pit mix. I’m perfectly happy to go along with it though, I like pit dogs very much. 
Seriously, what’s his breed?
Seriously? That’s the best you could come up with?
I understand that you’re using the dictionary definition of the word – but the dictionary definition of the word “Liberal” and the way that “Liberal” is used by Ann Coulter is entirely different. Yet, looking up “Liberal” in any dictionary doesn’t yield those negative connotations.
The connotation it carries is defending something inherently unpopular and typically wrong.
No, fascism is unpopular, and fascist-apologists defend it.
Pit bulls are no more or less popular than Rots, Yorkies or Poodles.
You are correct, that is what the word means. However, that’s not necessary all that the word means.
He’s a Dogo Argentino.