# The "Pit Bull" Myth

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pit-bull-myth/518682>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [November 23, 2009, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pit-bull-myth/518682 "2009-11-23T19:55:46Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 154

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![NajaNivea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NajaNivea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NajaNivea)\
**Post date:** [November 26, 2009, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pit-bull-myth/518682/154 "2009-11-26T20:43:44Z")

</div>

> [@magellan01](#):
>
> After that, if one breed (any one of them) is bred to fight, selectively encouraging those traits that make it better at killing—both physically and tempermentally—that breed would be become MORE dangerous than if not so bred, wouldn’t it. And, therefore, MORE dangerous than those other dogs. Right?

…You do realize, of course, that a fair number of those breeds up there were bred to fight _human beings_, selectively encouraging those traits that would make them better at killing _human beings_ both physically and temperamentally…right? That several of the breeds are bred to fight wolves, foxes or coyotes, a couple for lions or mountain lions, a whole bunch of them for wild boar…? So yes, I do agree with your statement–that dogs bred for battle-related work duties have stronger temperaments and greater potential for harm if involved in human conflict. As I said, _many_ medium and large working breeds fit the bill, pit dogs no more so than any other.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-pit-bull-myth/518682)._