#i also don't trust laypeople to id breeds given how many can't and just default to a handful of breeds

[awkward-teabag]

I've seen so many people say a dog they don't like is a pit bull or pit mix. I've also seen shelters straight up lie about what breed a dog is if it has any pit bull in it because there's such a stigma about them.

People also cherry pick bite statistics to fit their view of dog breeds. I used to work with reactive dogs and dogs with a bite history and it was golden retrievers and similar family dogs that were the ones to be most wary of. They're much more common, people think they're fine, and leave children alone with them because "they wouldn't hurt them!"

Throw in how reporting that the family dog attacked someone and you have people lying about the dog and circumstances so they don't have to deal with the fact they own a dangerous dog or are forced to euthanize the family dog.

Small dogs bit a lot, too, but because small dog bites don't typically land people in hospital and small dogs' fear and aggression gets laughed off, it's not recorded.

Not that pit bulls can't bite, but any dog can do that. Instead of relying on breed, look at the behavior, the owner, and the circumstances. Also do some basic learning on dog behavior 'cause dogs are really good at communicating how they're feeling and give copious warnings before they resort to breaking skin. Typically the only time they don't is when they've been abused, were weaned way too young, or punished for giving any sort of warning. It has nothing to do with breed and everything to do with their experiences and owner(s).

It's also a major risk to leave an infant/toddler/small child alone with any dog regardless of breed. Don't do that. Ever.

re: the pit bull post: I've found that the Great Pit Bull Debate is an excellent way to find out who understands the limitations of statistics and who doesn't. Like oh, you found a stat saying pitties bite more? And how did they verify the breed of each dog hmmm? How did they account for mixes? Oh I see they just went off of untrained visual IDs with zero genetic confirmation and then failed to mention that other studies have shown that even with training people are really bad at visually IDing dog breeds? Interesting....

and most importantly: a lot of those statistics are originally recorded by cops responding to the bite incident