[Ellie May]

See how fast this turned though from a thread that was kind of anti-pit bull to a thread that is focusing on how small dogs cause less damage if they bite... So if pits are banned, there is nothing stopping us from banning rotts, boxers, mastiffs, shepherds, chows, huskies, etc, etc, etc. These breeds are powerful and can easily cause damage too (and they do). Then still if we are wooried about injury, the rest of the large breeds have to be added in.

Isn't is unneutered, chained males that are most likely to attack? Well, there is no way to know how many of each breed fit this category. Pits often live in these condiions and a lot of owners shouldn't even own fish. So just because it may look like they are responsible for the most attacks doesn't necessarily mean much. Of course the attack rate is going to be higher for a breed treated like this one.

And a friend owns a Boston/bull dog mix that looks like a pit mix. So then Boston and bull dog mixes could be called pit mixes (as Kellie was saying). So there are dogs out there being called pits that definitely aren't.

I can say in a stressful situation for dogs (vet office), pits are not the doggs that cause problems. And actually, cats are pretty darn miserable to work with and their bites cause very serious infections.