• Instigate@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well surely it’s a spectrum that people are advocating an arbitrary line be placed on. Once this breed is gone, what about the next most aggressive breed? They then become the most aggressive breed and there’ll be calls to weed them out too. Dogs kill more humans than any other non-human vertebrate in the world by a very long shot - getting rid of one breed isn’t going to reduce that number to zero.

    To clarify, I’m not against the move of banning the breed at all, I’m just acutely aware that it’s making an arbitrary distinction.

    • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pitbulls are deadlier than all other breeds combined. They are 10 times as deadly as the next most aggressive breed. You don’t need to pull out the slippery slope fallacy, when the line is very clearly at pitbulls.

    • Carlo@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Dogs kill more humans than any other non-human vertebrate in the world by a very long shot

      I looked into this, based on some other comments. Turns out it’s snakes. Various sources list dogs at between 13,000 and 35,000 deaths per year, and snakes in a range of 75,000-100,000.

      Edit: but if we’re talking one species, dogs might edge out the deadliest snake. Really hard to say, based on the data I was able to find.

    • themajesticdodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That is not a good argument, it is dishonest and disingenuous.

      You’re actually using the same logic people used to try and avoid gay marriage.