• AquaTofana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    They think that they’re making a clever point. Of course larger dogs are inherently more dangerous than tiny dogs. No one is disputing that.

    But to advocate for the complete wiping out of an entire breed versus mandatory training classes for owners is an insane answer.

    Make “dangerous breeds” more difficult to get, sure. I agree with that. But I can NOT with the “wipe out all pitbull/rotties/dobermans/GSDs/etc”

    • ghen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      A moment of silence for the victims of Labradors then.

      Pit bull apologists refuse to just look at the numbers logically. We don’t keep pet tigers, we shouldn’t keep pet pit bulls.

      • FriedCheese@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d be suspicious that any lab that may have killed or severely injured someone isn’t a “lab mix” like the shelters push out.

      • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I just really don’t know how the mandatory training sessions doesn’t solve the problem for everyone.

        People who are ACTUALLY dedicated to raising these dogs will still get them. Those who would end up as shitty owners won’t bother with the hassle.

        Dogs get a better owner; owners get a better dog. Win-win all around.

        I grew up with Rottweilers, which were the “pitbulls” of the 90s. I have had 2 Dobermans, one sleeping next to me right now, and they were the “pitbulls” of the 80s.

        I fail to see how extermination is the answer when we have other methods available.

        • ghen@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not extermination, just stop breeding them for retail sale. No one is advocating going door to door

          • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s weird how people insist that a certain breeed needs to be forced to keep existing. Many dog breeds no longer exist. In fact you can argue many breeds have died off and replaced with abominations.

            • ghen@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              All of my dogs have only ever been rescue dogs anyway so mixed breeds for practically all of them. Purebred everything is garbage.

    • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wiping out? Why keep breeding something humans created in the first place. It’s cruel to them and humans. Just like pugs and a bunch of other breeds that are cruel. Dogs are a human creation and humanity shoukd take responsibility and stop breeding them. Mutts are as close as natural and stable as you’re gonna get.

      • lseif
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        omfg. basically the same argument as eugenics*.

        * of course eugenics is worse but you see my point

    • Nakedmole@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Wiping out? Why not just forbid malicious breeding goals, like aggression, bite force and of course torture / unhealthy breeding?