Small dogs are more aggressive, big dogs can do more damage. Ultimately, it’s a matter of training - how are they raised? - and a matter of the owner maintaining control. I really don’t believe in the whole “some breeds are inherently evil” thing.
The statistics on dog bites in many countries are also pretty clear that some breeds, like pit bulls and German shepherds are responsible for a disproportionate amount of attacks on humans.
So while the great majority of pit bulls are loving dogs without any aggression, I would never take the risk of owning one.
We do not let people walk around society with hyenas and tigers and lions and wolves and chimpanzees. What makes a dog with "pit" or "bull" in its name any different? And maybe this applies to other dog breeds too, I am not a dog person, but the point is if an animal is capable of causing serious harm to people, then society has an interest in restricting its population where people do not want to worry about being attacked by animals.
I've personally never seen an aggressive pit bull but I've seen aggressive mixed breeds and german shepherds. I don't think it would be reasonable for me to conclude based on my observations that no pit bulls are vicious - and thus I'd rather look at actual data that has been normalized when judging the relative merit of one large dog breed vs another.
I don't think anyone really claims that; or at least very few people claim that. It's about averages in behaviour, combined with the greater damage you mentioned. I think almost everyone agrees that on average there are differences in personality between dog breeds. These dogs have been responsible for more than half of deaths in recent years, and I don't think half the dogs in the UK are Bully XLs.
In the end basically nothing at all is lost by banning a few breeds beyond upsetting a few people who want a dog in a very peculiar shape and accept no other shapes, to which I say: "if you're such a dog lover then why do you care so greatly about the exact shape of your dog?"
Think that’s impossible? Ask a dog breeder. It’s possible, it’s practiced.
Go find that video of the guy stealing a bike and the house golden coming up for belly runs.
Dog breeds have different behaviors that we’ve deliberately bred into them.
It’s not the dog’s fault. It’s our fault. And our responsibility.
Claiming that it’s not real in the face of evidence is an example of dangerous, willful ignorance.
https://worldanimalfoundation.org/dogs/pitbull-statistics/#:....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in...
- Many small dogs, in general, are poorly behaved because you can just pick them up and move them instead of having to train them.
- People also make sweeping statements about breeds like the American Pit-Bull Terrier when the variation within the breed is very large.
- If I'm an asshole who's going to train a dog to be aggressive I'm going to pick one that looks scary.
- Selective breeding within a breed can change temperament as well.
- Banning individual breeds is stupid whack-a-mole. People will just pivot to a different large-dog breed.
- If you want to make people not use dogs as weapons, about your only choice would be to ban dogs over a certain weight. This would almost certainly ban e.g. Bloodhounds (males commonly exceed 100lbs when at a healthy weight) though so isn't going to happen.
Can't believe I need to remind you, but humans still actually own dogs, like property. And wait till you hear what some humans do to other animals and sea creatures. Apparently humanity collectively decided it will not treat animals like humans so here we are. If you go vegan and propose a plan to ban all that injustice maybe some will agree with you. But otherwise there's much worse stuff than "dog racial crime statistics" to think about, stuff we do to animals that don't even murder us unlike these dogs
Humans are different than dogs! Believe it or not!