I think before you accuse people of being unintelligent based upon their chosen profession or intelligence quotient, you should probably take a look at the character you presented us with in your first post. What I gleaned from it would be that you are initially on the offensive, while not being aggressive, you are being accusatory. You fail to present any form of reliable statistics to us, and on top of that, you will probably find very few reliable statistics between rumors and media hype on the web. and these are often fallible. You also claim people with high paying jobs are all stand up citizens, and sure some are, but look at many companies today who cut corners and save a little money at the expense of a large number of people, that’s politics, and this is not what this thread is about. My point being is that you are using a very biased approach to the topic of pitbull ownership and haven’t seemed to be gaining information, while being respectful and polite, but possibly ignorant of facts.
You also don’t consider the statistics of what you may have read in terms of the many variables behind them and their potential falibility. Media sells stories people want to hear, and more often then not they misconstrue figures and hide facts to tell a story that will lead to a winning headline worthy of catching someone’s attention as they pass by a newsstand. While some people throw out ratios such as 2% of dogs owned are pibulls but 1/3rd of dog attacks are by pitbulls, less scientifically break down the possible errors of such a statistic. For one, I highly doubt they are excluding bite counts from strays or animals with unfortunate pasts with neglectful owners who leave their dogs out when they lose a fight or they can’t train them properly. These bites would get counted to embellish this disparity between the two numbers. Furthermore, we have incompetant owners who don’t train their pitbulls properly, as with any breed. the difference is they are powerful, more so than many breeds, the difference is that they might be able to commit an act, whereas a “loveble lab” or “harmless yorkie” might not have the opportunity. To say a dog is more dangerous after it commits a deed than one who is restrained is understandable, but the fact that the drive is there in the restrained animal is often overlooked. I digress, further fallibility would lie in how many times an attack may be repeatedly reported by the “so-called statistician”. I’m guessing alot would have to do with number reported by a news company and I’d wager quite a few would have duplicate stories since pitbull bites tend to travel a bit further than the tiny pinch of a bichon. I’m not saying I’m right, but the world of statistics is so easily twisted.
How many people in these “successful” proffesions do you think really have time to train a dog properly? As for the people at home, what do you think their significant other might be doing? possibly cooking dinner or taking care of children. When you consider the time and effort involved in training and caring for a dog, you have to alot for the fact that these people probably aren’t spending quality dog training time with their pet. Now let’s throw a dog’s natural instincts in there. A dog may be more apt to dominance than another, and it takes a decent amount of time investment to show that the owner and humans are dominant over the dog. Look it up on google.
Small dog syndrome is another point I’d like to address. People don’t acknowledge that small dogs often get their way as they are “cute” when they exhibit signs of dominant behavior and end up thinking they are in fact above the humans they live with in their “family pack”. The yipping, constant attention grabbing, furniture climbing and aggressive barking towards strangers is not what a properly trained dog should be allowed to do. Apply this to larger dogs, if they were to show signs of these behaviors, they would be corrected and likely chastized, my point being the dog does not often take into account it’s physical size, as it is not aware, it is the mentality of the dog and it’s surrounding family/pack that cause it to show signs of dominance or submissiveness, and is unfair to judge them for that trait alone. Now, I don’t say an owner should not account for this, by all means they should absolutely understand “for the dog” that it is larger and behave accordingly, but when you have an owner who is permissive with a small dog, and then it has a larger dog, it would be very easy for things to get out of hand due to human incompetence.
I’d write more but I think you should seriously take some time to learn about these dogs from reliable sources instead of, as you might say “emotion driven bigots”. Learn how to pose a question instead of hiding behind misinformation and poorly thought out methods to demean people you don’t know.
IQ 147, profession: Engineering and Management