• Ginny [they/she]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 hours ago

    As previous commenters have said, in the tragic cases where bully breeds have been involved in lethal attacks there are indications that the dogs were not handled/trained/socialized correctly.

    Nevertheless, to account for the kind of disproportionality on display, it seems to me there’s only really two ways to explain it:

    1. bullies are innately more likely to attack when poorly trained, or;
    2. people who are unable to train dogs are more likely to own bullies.
    • gid@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      bullies are innately more likely to attack when poorly trained, or;

      Unfortunately I can’t find statistics for the UK, but these statistics for the USA show that pitbulls account for 22 lethal attacks a year. That’s out of roughly 4.5 million pitbulls (source). That is an incredibly low percentage, even if it is higher than the percentage of lethal attacks by other types of dog breed, to the point where we’re comparing differences of fractions of a percent.

      To give that figure of number of fatalities some perspective, roughly the same number of people (21) are killed per year by cattle.

      But taking either of your points to be true, both these cases can be resolved without banning (and putting down or destroying) particular breeds, for example:

      • provide education on training and dog handling
      • better controls and standards for dog breeding
      • licensing/training as part of a condition of dog ownership

      There are existing organisations and dog clubs that are already offer some of these, and would be well-placed to tie in as providers if these things were legislated.