Wow this post got popular. I got called into work and didnt see the replies, sorry ladies and gentlemen! Trying to catch up tonight.

  • dan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean it sounds like just the one, American XL bully. Seems perfectly reasonable to me given how ridiculously powerful these dogs are makes them extremely dangerous when they’re being aggressive.

    • CaptObvious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      46
      ·
      1 year ago

      People are more dangerous than any dog. Can we ban them on looks too, please?

      Oh wait. The US already does this. It’s called “racism.”

      • dan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I tell you what, if we specifically genetically engineer people to be aggressive and powerful and they start eating toddlers faces then I’m cool with banning them too.

        “Dog racism”, fuck off.

        • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a bad faith argument people make to use people’s morality against them. Pitt owners tend to be conservative nazi types and they think they’re clever trying to use "woke"language

      • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In the sense that humans are responsible for these natural abuses existing, sure. Humans can stop being dangerous in this sense by not breeding these unnatural predators.