"You delusional nanny-statists types are actually more danger to society than runamok pit bulls, because of the way you manipulate information, for the purposes of disinforming people--all to feed your agenda, which is to convince us (and yourself, no doubt), that all pits are just the spawn of Satan and that you hold some illusional higher moral ground."
You claim I am I liar, prove it or prove yourself one as you have already proved yourself a fool.
You asked me, "Present one fact that refutes the FACT that pit bulls are statistically the most dangerous dog in America" and I showed that in the last years of the study 93-98 that this was not the case.
What conclusion can be drawn from the study? Yes that "pit bulls" account for a significant percentage of all fatalities but also that the percentage varies over time.
Is it the case in in 2005? I don't know, but with the increase of low-life gangsta/drug dealing culture and its adherents misuse of the breed and the general increase in popularity of the breed it would not surprise me if they were on the top of list.
I'm old enough to remember when "pit bulls" were not even on the radar, when GS and Dobes were the "bad" dogs.
In fact if you look to the Lab case it comes from a study from 1975-80 where stats showed...
"the following breeds as responsible for the indicated number of deaths: German Shepherd Dog (n = 16); Husky-type dog (9); Saint Bernard (8); Bull Terrier (6); Great Dane (6); Malamute (5); Golden Retriever (3); Boxer (2); Dachshund (2); Doberman Pinscher (2); Collie (2); Rottweiler (1); Basenji (1); Chow Chow (1); Labrador Retriever (1); Yorkshire Terrier (1); and mixed and unknown breed (15)."
I do not hide the facts but rather look at them and seek to find ways to solve the problem without resorting to hyperbole and putting all owners of a particular breed or their dogs into one socialist-sized box.
The crux of my argument if you need to hear it again is that ALL dog related fatalities and maulings are serious and a comprehensive response must be found that takes into account ALL dog related fatalities and maulings.
The proper conservative way to deal with it is by demanding personal responsibility and accountablity.
You got a problem with that?
"I do not hide the facts but rather look at them and seek to find ways to solve the problem without resorting to hyperbole and putting all owners of a particular breed or their dogs into one socialist-sized box."
What a pompous twit. "Resorting," "hyperbole"? Dude, junior high is over. Socialist-sized box? My God, give me twenty minutes to recover, laughing so damned hard here....
Grow up. You champion a breed of dog that is unpredictable and brings grievous bodily harm to many people, especially children, and too often death...and you want to "debate" it?
In-effing-credible.