A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
I'm not a dog breed expert, but...
The other day an agressive dog that looked like a pitbull, suddenly lunged at me barking loudly... It was about 10ft away from me but still scared the shit out of me
The owner yanked the dog back on its leash and i thought, "FML, the only thing that saved me from a deadly mauling was a 3/4 inch wide piece of nylon with a metal clip the guy bought off amazon for $5"
"But my little velvet hippo couldn't hurt anyone!"
Hippos are super aggressive, territorial, and will bite a crocodiles in half. It’s amazing that’s supposed to be a cute, disarming nickname for a breed notorious for the same traits.
To be fair most won’t, but they definitely can and do.
Especially when they are jaws on legs that are more inclined compared to other dogs.
Yup. I've crunched the numbers before, and it's something like 1 in 10,000 pit bulls will attack a human or other companion animal every year. It's not likely for any given pit to attack a person (which I can anecdotally support–they're obnoxiously friendly and loving in my experience), but it's also like 10 times more than the next most vicious breed. In my opinion, it's not worth euthanizing every member of the breed, but it is worth neutering every one. We don't need dog breeds, especially ones responsible for over half of the violent attacks on people and other animals.
Of course, I'm in support of neutering all companion animals to reduce the stray population and ease the strain on shelters, regardless of breed or species. Breed specific laws are only one step towards fixing the larger problem.
Of course, I’m in support of neutering all companion animals to ease the stray population and the strain on shelters, regardless of breed or species. Breed specific laws are only one step towards fixing the larger problem.
Bob Barker is smiling down on you from heaven for this
The actual issue is that's it's a degenerative disease in dogs of similar breeds. At some point they get old and less able to recognize friend from foe. That might be ok if it weren't for the jaws you mentioned.
Exactly.
I'd go one step farther and even say if they even had the same amount of attacks as other dogs, had no possible mental diseases, and all want to caring homes I would still put restrictions/ban on them.
They are just too large to handle, too big of a bite to brush off, and end up in dog attacks a lot. That's enough for me.
It’s funny they call them hippos considering that hippos are extremely dangerous and vicious wild animals.
A shitbull owner using a leash, rare combination.
Unsurprising. Large “power breeds” like pit bulls I have always found questionable to have.
No restrictions or licenses? No muzzles at least?
A good thing they banned them.
Though I still dislike the outright malice and hate I see when a pit bull in a photo might be doing nothing but staring at a sunset. A bit hate crazy.
I used to have a Pitbull, such a beautiful girl, who one day chased and killed one of our cats she'd grown up with. My friend had her brother, such a beautiful boy, who one day chased and killed one of their cats.
Last week, on my lifestyle block, two Pitbulls appeared and killed my chickens before I could stop them. I chased the fuckers off but haven't found where they came from.
That is all.
Every couple of weeks I feed mine a toddler, it seems to keep the violent tendencies away.
Dog breeds all exist for a purpose either still relevant or now redundant.
Before you get a dog, understand what that breed exists for. Even the best obedience training may not overcome generations of refined and selected natural instincts.
It's never the dogs fault. It is always your fault.
Whoa grab some popcorn folks cause this comment section is a dumpster fire. Do we have a lemmy drama community yet?
My neighbor has a pit mix and it snarled at me gnashing its teeth once as she walked by. I was just standing there by my car minding my own business barely even acknowledging them. I jump and yell Jesus wtf lady omg. She just made pathetic excuses, he keeps me safe, never does that, it's fiiiiine etc. Ive told her numerous times she needs to train it at the bare minimum, preferably destroy it. I've observed it doing the same to other people as they walk past. I bought pepper spray and look out for them very carefully whenever I go to my car now. I bet it's just a matter of time before someone gets mauled and I hope it's not me. Fucking hate those things.
After watching my cop neighbor try to drive a dog away with pepper spray, it's not going to help much. Even direct hits to the eyes didn't seem to affect the dog much.
I do wonder how much is the breed and how much is shitty owners being attracted to perceived scary breeds. My guess would be a bit of both.
You don’t need to train a pointer puppy to point. They do it from birth. You don’t need to train a sheep dog to herd. They do it from the moment they can walk. You don’t need to teach a pit bull to latch and shake. They also do that from birth. Training can mitigate the risk, but they’re still very dangerous dogs.
In the past I'd say it's a bit of both, though moreso the type of shitheads attracted to 'scary' breeds is also as likely to be shit at training/ socialising them. There's some good evidence though that this particular 'XL' breed has higher rates of inbreeding and has already been selected for agression (not to mention their increased size & power).
Think it's a fair point some are making though that just banning the latest dangerous breed is missing the wood for the trees. There should be serious penalties from any dog attack, for the owner; treat it the same as possession of a dangerous weapon like a gun or zombie knife.
It's bit of both. These morons aren't lining up to buy daschunds.
You need to go one step further - why do people feel the need to own such dogs in the first place? Some people would say the dog is for protection (from who? And why are those people a threat? It's well known that lack of social and communal services lead to young people ending up involved with gangs and violence), others use it as a status symbol (don't even get me started on consumerism, and commodification of natural shit like animals), and in almost all cases there is a lot of toxic masculinity involved.
These are all deep rooted systemic issues that go far beyond both dogs and owners (don't get me wrong - I am not excusing bad dog ownership, and don't think people should be raising violent and aggressive dogs), and they all need addressing to actually resolve the problem, but it's much easier for those in charge to focus on the end result, and make it an individual issue, they don't care about making society better, they just want power and money.
There's a story that a family dog got loose after a car crash. They found the dog a few days later ... herding sheep. No one ever taught the dog to herd sheep.
Literally all I'm saying is that the vast majority of pit bulls aren't violent. I fucking said I'm in favor of spaying and neutering the breed out of existence because the few that do become violent are excessively dangerous.
Pity, teachers should have a good pitbulls to stop the bad ones.
This isn't the time to discuss pitbull control.
They are poor misbreeds anyway.