What nonsense.
“Petey” the Little Rascal dog, is supposed to somehow prove that pit bulls haven’t killed people? Lions in the zoo can be cute, too.
I also like how in the same breath pit bull defenders try to “reason” with those of us who are “misguided” about the danger of pit bulls, and then defend the breed by anthropomorphizing its behavior.
For example, by telling us bedtime stories of how some pit bull “saved” his owner or owner’s family by chasing and biting a criminal, when in fact the dog just got lucky by biting a burglar when it could just as well have been the milkman, as far as the dog itself is concerned.
You still claim that it is the 'nature' of the dog to be a killer, rather than how it was raised, or 'nurtured'. A study by Raghavan, published in The Canadian Veterinary Journal in June 2008 showed that of 28 dog-bite-related fatalities reported in Canada from 1990–2007, only one was from a Pit Bull. The study also stated that, "A higher proportion of sled dogs and, possibly, mixed-breed dogs in Canada than in the United States caused fatalities, as did multiple dogs rather than single dogs. Free-roaming dog packs, reported only from rural communities, caused most on-reserve fatalities."
Several studies determined that pit bull owners, and owners of other "vicious" or "high risk" breeds such as Akita, Chow Chow, Doberman Pinscher, Rottweiler, and Wolf-mix, are more likely to have criminal convictions and are more likely to display antisocial behaviors. A 2006 study compared owners of "high risk" dogs to owners of "low risk" dogs. "High risk" dogs included “vicious” dogs by breed (e.g., pit bulls) or “vicious” actions (e.g., any dog that had bitten, attacked, or killed a person or other animal). The study determined that "high risk" dog owners had nearly 10 times as many criminal convictions than did "low risk" dog owners. A 2009 study and a followup 2012 study generally supported these findings. Compare and contrast that with the recover/re-homing of so many of Vick's dogs, noted in post # 23.
Since so many of Vick's dogs, born and bred to fight, have been rehabilitated and since the studies quoted above show that "high risk" dog owners had nearly 10 times as many criminal convictions as did "low risk" dog owners, reason would suggest that the 'gangsta' and 'wannabe' types purchase these dogs to terrorise others. This further suggests that they train these dogs to be vicious, rather than a 'natural' viciousness to people. But 'reason' is not how you operate, is it?