Because… they are no more dangerous to a young child than any other breed?
(I only allow my baby to go walkies with a Golden Retriever.)
Exactly. Making a special note of the breed feels like some sort of inference about the family, but it’s entirely possible I’m seeing something that isn’t there.
Well, you’re not seeing the sarcasm that is there.
Clearly. 
If you want to start a thread making the case that Pit bulls are sweet and loving dogs and don’t deserve their violent reputation, you are of course free to do so. But it’s disingenuous to imply that this is widely accepted and that it’s incomprehensible why the breed would be mentioned in the story.
Perhaps I will. I’d always heard that a dog’s behavior is down to both nature and nurture, but that’s not germane to the thread so I’ll leave it there.
Since the “nature” part that contributes to behavior is the breed, what is your objection?
Just that, obviously, any dog can be a mean one if treated badly and pit bulls have possibly gotten an exaggeratedly bad rap. Granted, according to the CDC pitts are responsible for a large amount of overall dog bites, so I’m quite open to being wrong.
I agree, it’s the unsupervised child outside that’s the danger. That the “scary” dog is on a leash held by the toddler and going for a walk about is the least offensive part of the family’s situation. But will the kid let go if Scary sees a rabbit?
So the lady gets fined which does zilch to improve the situation at home. And now the kid gets leashed maybe crated and Scary the dog doesn’t get walked.
Meanest dog in my neighborhood that used to run free was the old golden Oscar that hated school busses, barked and chased it twice a day.
And I’ve seen affectionate tame lions that wouldn’t hurt a fly. It’s all about nurture, right?
That pit bull was the child’s supervision and bodyguard.
Pit bull bites? I’ll bet anyone who tried to mess with that kid would find out.
To me the pit bull breed is relevant to mention. Not because it’s a demonic entity in dog form, waiting to murder anyone who gets within its vicinity. I grew up in a neighborhood with pit bulls and yes, they can be the sweetest and most gentle dogs if treated properly. They’re dogs, not coyotes.
It’s relevant because pit bulls are very powerful dogs. If it decides to take off after a car or frisbee with an 18-month-old holding the leash, that kid can’t control it. Not the way he might if it was a dachshund or chihuahua. It would be like dragging a Cabbage Patch Kid on a rope behind a pickup truck.
To me that’s why it’s relevant. If you said it was a Great Dane or a St. Bernard I’d have the same reaction.
I can back that. Makes sense.
I laughed a lot. I’m going to hell, aren’t I?
I’d be willing to bet the dog takes better protective care of the kid than the mom.
Why would you think that? Any training (if any at all) was done by the mother, not the kid.
Not thinking the dog’s been formally trained by the slattern of a mother, but canines tend to be instinctively protective of their pack, especially the pups.
To continue the hijack, there’s zero evidence that it actually was a “pit bull” and not some other “scary” dog like a Rottie or a shepherd mix
You thought elevator surfing was bad…
To a pit bull bigot, they all look alike.
https://pics.me.me/official-police-canine-identification-chart-pit-bull-pit-bull-pit-9401525.png
ETA: Nothing wrong with Rotties either. Most of the ones I’ve met are as sweet and lovable as any pit bull. Ditto Dobermans.