Teddy (left), and Sampson (right)

  • WamGams@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    So your argument started out as pits cause 60% of attacks to now being the 5 pit types, the commonly mistaken for Pitts, and mutts comprise 60% of attacks.

    These are two separate arguments being made. The first one is false, and the second one probably is true, bit you are presenting it as if it is the first argument.

      • WamGams@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Your own source, an attorney’s office, is who states that mutts with pit in their genetics are part of that 60% number.

        This is your own source.

          • WamGams@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If your argument isn’t that mutts + pit bulls and commonly mistaken for like Cane Corso’s make up 60%, than that is not a source backing up your argument.

            Your second source separates mutts and backs up your original claim?

            • Noite_Etion@lemmy.worldBanned from community
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Got any evidence at all to prove any of your points… No?

              Your second source separates mutts and backs up your original claim?

              Read it and find out, is that so hard? No wonder all your links have been irrelevant, you probably didn’t even read your own evidence.

              Here I have pulled one graph from that page, you dont even need to read the whole article now. But if you did you would find a break down by year, case, breed and causes for attacks. Along with evidence backing up each case.

              If your argument isn’t that mutts + pit bulls and commonly mistaken for like Cane Corso’s make up 60%, than that is not a source backing up your argument.

              Are you seriously asking me what my point is when I have repeated at nauseum. Are you that dense?

              Provide evidence for any of the crap you have dribbling about or go away lol. And until then I’m not going to bother to continue engaging you.

              • WamGams@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I see at the bottom of your graph, it specifically states that “all other dogs” excludes 3 breeds, all 3 breeds known to be commonly mistaken as Pitts.

                So… Where are their numbers? Are they in the Pit Bull category as I said they would be?