Social Dog of Peace Fatally Mauls 3-Month-Old Baby, Injures Mother in NJ

[Hdfi]

Another day, another pitbull attack...

 

[spamking]

So true story. I just bought an automotive carpet cleaner off marketplace. Talking to the guy to arrange pick up. He mentions he has 11 puppies. I asked what kind. He said Ptibull Wolf mixes. Hahahahahahahahahha

How mad does that make some of you to know some random dude is breeding Pitbull Wolf hybrids in the backyard of a major city?????

Hahahahahahahah I can't wait to post pics tommorow. Think of the nightmares some of you are going to have over this.

In the late 90s I had a malamute/husky/wolf hybrid. That dude was a very smart dog. Protective, but smart.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Ignorant to what? Google the statistics. Read them. It’s readily available information just like the breed history. Disagreeing with your half baked opinion is not ignorance.

Very, very easy information to find and there’s no way you can spin it where it doesn’t tell the story of fighting dogs who were selectively bred for 200+ years to fight to the death and have sky high prey drives. Here’s a good example : https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallm...erous-dog-breeds-infographic/?sh=6109e23e62f8

Enjoy pitbulls if you want but there’s not a reasonable person who looks at any of these statistics or the latest mauling of a child and thinks “yeah this is a grand conspiracy by big chihuahua corp for sure”

Way to go. You just proved your ignorance by even mentioning that Pits were selectively bred for hundreds of years to fight each other. That's animal aggression which isn't the same as human aggression. This is why temperament testing differentiates between the two and they're conducted separately. According to the ATTS Pits have a high passing rate there. Also, those media statistics you keep relying on use visual breed identification as their methodology. It's extremely inaccurate. Already been proven in formal scientific studies. You must be new to this debate. Welcome.

 

[WklySportsMemes]

Well since you keep droning on about the trump election to somebody from europe, the one incapable of any coherent thoughts is obviously you.

God this guy is so dumb. It's like talking to a retarded child who is having a fit.

How big of a loser do you have to be to have your life revolve around making conspiracies about a country you don't even understand or would get ran out of? Never forget that you have no credibility after years of handicap struggle posting about a country you couldn't even point to on a map.

Seems a bit suspect to be literally creaming over some pit/wolf mixes but I'm not making any accusations but it would explain his fondness for canines

This is a great example of how socially backwards the average Cruella De Vil in this thread is. Dogs in general are considered "men's best friend." However, "liking dogs" around here gets some immature repressed dork to sexualize it. Didn't care but referencing the post again huh. Those wolf pitbull hybrids are on your mind.

 

[Hog-train]

Way to go. You just proved your ignorance by even mentioning that Pits were selectively bred for hundreds of years to fight each other. That's animal aggression which isn't the same as human aggression. This is why temperament testing differentiates between the two and they're conducted separately. According to the ATTS Pits have a high passing rate there. Also, those media statistics you keep relying on use visual breed identification as their methodology. It's extremely inaccurate. Already been proven in formal scientific studies. You must be new to this debate. Welcome.

Animal aggression can easily be transferable to human aggression. Ever try to get in the way of two dogs fighting each other? They can easily start attacking you in their frenzied state.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Animal aggression can easily be transferable to human aggression. Ever try to get in the way of two dogs fighting each other? They can easily start attacking you in their frenzied state.

Getting accidentally bitten is the same as intending to injure a person? LOL. Again, they conduct temperament testing separately against animals and people. Agitation testing, for example, is conducted towards people. Not animals. Some agencies conduct their testing using both.

 

[Hog-train]

Getting accidentally bitten is the same as intending to injure a person? LOL. Again, they conduct temperament testing separately against animals and people. Agitation testing, for example, is conducted towards people. Not animals. Some agencies conduct their testing using both.

If you don't properly train and socialize pitbulls, that in built animal aggression can easily turn into straight up aggression and territorial attacks.

Or attacks on small children.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

If you don't properly train and socialize pitbulls, that in built animal aggression can easily turn into straight up aggression and territorial attacks.

Or attacks on small children.

All dogs should be properly trained and socialized. Not just Pit Bulls. There have been dozens of different breeds that have attacked and even fatally killed people. The CDC studied 20 years of data to determine this.

 

[Hog-train]

All dogs should be properly trained and socialized. Not just Pit Bulls. There have been dozens of different breeds that have attacked and even fatally killed people. The CDC studied 20 years of data to determine this.

But pitbulls are more aggressive than most other breeds and more powerful.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

But pitbulls are more aggressive than most other breeds and more powerful.

Not toward humans they're not. One particular study found that they were no more aggressive than Golden Retrievers. In Ireland they came to the same conclusion. The BSL restricted breeds over there were no more aggressive than any of the unrestricted breeds. Temperament varies significantly from one individual dog to the next. That's the key here. Something that BSL misses entirely.

 

[LeonardoBjj]

One thing to take into consideration is the high volume of Pit-bull dogs in comparison with the Brazilian Filas, Dogo Argentinos, and Akitas. It is like a 10:1 ratio of Pit-Bulls to other obscure dog breeds.

- Akitas are really agressive. If they were more widespread.

 

[LeonardoBjj]

But pitbulls are more aggressive than most other breeds and more powerful.

- No them arent more powerful. The problem is how popular they are. And the idiots rising them. And even how much money you can spend on them. A giant dog is really expensive, pits are the new statrus dog.

 

[ThaiSexPills]

Way to go. You just proved your ignorance by even mentioning that Pits were selectively bred for hundreds of years to fight each other. That's animal aggression which isn't the same as human aggression. This is why temperament testing differentiates between the two and they're conducted separately. According to the ATTS Pits have a high passing rate there. Also, those media statistics you keep relying on use visual breed identification as their methodology. It's extremely inaccurate. Already been proven in formal scientific studies. You must be new to this debate. Welcome.

“ItS oNlY aGgReSSIVe To OtHeR AnIMaLs” lmao statistics tell us that is not true and what a stupid take anyways. It’s only going to kill your pets omg. Yeah, point proven. Why the fuck do you have these dogs?


Why not go buy a normal dog that isn’t going to rip a child apart. Having a fighting breed doesn’t make you as manly and tough as yky think. Hit the gym if you feel that way. There is zero rssson to own these dogs now that dog fighting is illegal. They are a danger to society. Everybody else with an aggressive breed admits it except pitbull owners who force their garbage dogs down everybody’s throat.

We hate your fighting dogs. Enjoy them while you can still have them. The world would be a better place without them. Just get a retriever ffs

 

[LeonardoBjj]

Not toward humans they're not. One particular study found that they were no more aggressive than Golden Retrievers. In Ireland they came to the same conclusion. The BSL restricted breeds over there were no more aggressive than any of the unrestricted breeds. Temperament varies significantly from one individual dog to the next. That's the key here. Something that BSL misses entirely.

- Sorry, Bro!

 

[LeonardoBjj]

It's because they are the Heavyweights of dog breeds. It's like that with humans too. Have you ever noticed that heavyweight fighters almost never talk trash or behave like a "Conor McGregor"? They are much calmer than their manlet counterparts.

- I do agree with you. Pits are really insecure dogs.
Maybe the have to compensate for a little something?
Probably the smallest penis of the canine world?

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

- Sorry, Bro!

“Conclusion
In this research project, no significant differences in the occurrence of aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations were found when comparing golden retrievers and 6 dog breeds affected by legislation. Therefore, assuming that certain dog breeds are especially dangerous and imposing controls on them cannot be ethologically justified. Consequently, legislation in Lower Saxony was changed, and breed lists were withdrawn.”

Ott, S.A., Schalke, E., von Gaertner, A.M., Hackbarth, H., 2007. Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed specific legislation regarding aggressive behavior. Journal of Veterinary Behavior 2, 92.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

“ItS oNlY aGgReSSIVe To OtHeR AnIMaLs” lmao statistics tell us that is not true and what a stupid take anyways. It’s only going to kill your pets omg. Yeah, point proven. Why the fuck do you have these dogs?


Why not go buy a normal dog that isn’t going to rip a child apart. Having a fighting breed doesn’t make you as manly and tough as yky think. Hit the gym if you feel that way. There is zero rssson to own these dogs now that dog fighting is illegal. They are a danger to society. Everybody else with an aggressive breed admits it except pitbull owners who force their garbage dogs down everybody’s throat.

We hate your fighting dogs. Enjoy them while you can still have them. The world would be a better place without them. Just get a retriever ffs

Statistics that rely on an unscientific methodology called visual breed identification. That is, untrained observers identify these dogs by sight. Very problematic considering that even trained observers have a hard time accurately determining breed. Unless you know the total population of that particular breed in the region its being studied then you cannot determine bite risk. The CDC agrees.

 

[ThaiSexPills]

“Conclusion
In this research project, no significant differences in the occurrence of aggressive behavior in inappropriate situations were found when comparing golden retrievers and 6 dog breeds affected by legislation. Therefore, assuming that certain dog breeds are especially dangerous and imposing controls on them cannot be ethologically justified. Consequently, legislation in Lower Saxony was changed, and breed lists were withdrawn.”

Ott, S.A., Schalke, E., von Gaertner, A.M., Hackbarth, H., 2007. Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed specific legislation regarding aggressive behavior. Journal of Veterinary Behavior 2, 92.

If they weren’t aggressive, they wouldn’t attack people more than every other breed (and it’s not even close).

They were bred not to show signs of aggression. They hit factory reset and just go for the kill. I’ve owned them. They’re always great dogs until they’re suddenly not.

You can disregard all these studies. All that matters is the rate that they’re attacking people in society and that rate is way higher than any other dog and higher than most of other breeds combined. They’re dangerous animals and your selective blindness does not make you sounds smart like you think it does.

But yeah, you and your precious fighting dogs are totally the victims. Make sure to go on news stories about pitbulls ripping kids faces off and comment pics of your pitbull and say how your sweet baby would never. That’s totally normal behaviour for sure.

You’d have to be a sociopath, an idiot or an insecure man to own one of these dogs after seeing all the data.

 

[ThaiSexPills]

Statistics that rely on an unscientific methodology called visual breed identification. That is, untrained observers identify these dogs by sight. Very problematic considering that even trained observers have a hard time accurately determining breed. Unless you know the total population of that particular breed in the region its being studied then you cannot determine bite risk. The CDC agrees.

Oh here we go, tbe old “they weren’t real pitbulls”. Classic. It’s all a terrible coincidence for sure that the fighting dogs are fighting. LOL!!!!

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

If they weren’t aggressive, they wouldn’t attack people more than every other breed (and it’s not even close).

They were bred not to show signs of aggression. They hit factory reset and just go for the kill. I’ve owned them. They’re always great dogs until they’re suddenly not.

You can disregard all these studies. All that matters is the rate that they’re attacking people in society and that rate is way higher than any other dog and higher than most of other breeds combined. They’re dangerous animals and your selective blindness does not make you sounds smart like you think it does.

But yeah, you and your precious fighting dogs are totally the victims. Make sure to go on news stories about pitbulls ripping kids faces off and comment pics of your pitbull and say how your sweet baby would never. That’s totally normal behaviour for sure.

You’d have to be a sociopath, an idiot or an insecure man to own one of these dogs after seeing all the data.

Wrong. A breed can be responsible for more attacks than the others and still be a lower bite risk. Here's why. The CDC did this study and the AVMA published it.

“In contrast to what has been reported in the news media, the data from this study CANNOT be used to infer any breed-specific risk for dog bite fatalities (e.g.,neither pit bull-type dogs nor Rottweilers can be said to be more “dangerous” than any other breed based on this study). To obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States. Such information is not available.

Data from this study indicate that the number of dogs of a given breed associated with fatal human attacks varies over time, further suggesting that such data should not be used to support the inherent “dangerousness” of any particular breed.”

https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/resources/javma_000915_fatalattacks.pdf