Posted on 09/14/2006 4:14:20 AM PDT by Wristpin
You never cease to amaze me with your fantastic research. Too bad many of the stories on that site are NOT pit bulls. The dog that assisted in killing the woman in KC was a boxer/am bull mix, which is in no part a pit bull. This was later found out by AC but not corrected, because the news has no obligation to do so. That is not the only case of mistaken identity, as it happens all the time. I would be willing to bet my house that a large number of the stories were of such undeniably shoddy reporting.
When are you going to realize that the media is biased? Now, it's common sense that if pit bull type dogs only represent a small percentage of attacks, that all the other breeds are NOT somehow overlooked by the media. It is a deliberate omission. I do not believe it is some kind of conspiracy, as that would be childish. However, I do think that if they are not willing to report about other breeds doing severe damage simply because they aren't what you would think of as vicious, they just might have motives that aren't pure and good.
They are not run by a government agency. Their service is not free. They write news that is catchy and has some kind of appeal. That is why they choose, every decade or so, a dog/politician/country/celebrity to hate, and they end up doing a really good job of convincing the rest of us that their "research" is fact. They have degrees in journalism, not biology, anatomy, physiology, psychology, or ecology, so why do people like you trust their words so totally? Do you really think they are out to provide you with the facts you need to be a success in life?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.