Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear
if you gave 100 labradors to crack dealers, then gave 100 pitbulls to ballerina's, then took stats 50 years later, i guarantee you the labs would be far more dangerous statistically, all these "stats" are useless if you look at the problem so vaguely
|
But you know that's not the case right.
The Crack dealers prefer their pittis and rotweillers because they are bigger and stronger and could make fatal damage. It's in their breed that they are more agressive. If you don't believe me just look back on the Pittis history, they were used to chase/fight bulls and later used them in dog fights in England in the 18th centruy.
The Staffordshire Pitbull breed won most times against other breeds.
Do I have to mention why?
But even if I may come across as a hater against these dogs, I don't have anything against them, but I do have something against people who get them and don't have the time to take care of their dogs.(Or have these macho views on them as moron Jade509 in this thread)
And that's every breed included, but if you don't take care of the top 3 most dangerous breeds you could be sitting on a monster ready to explode any second when he don't get regular exercise and proper living conditions
That's all I'm saying. My family had large dogs when I were a child too, and I've worked in a dog shop in my city....so make no mistake!
All dogs could hurt us, but some are more harmful than others.