Consoom Pit Bull 🐶
(media.scored.co)
New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
Toast message
Some breeds are more aggressive than others, but the training is the main factor above all else. Untrained dogs bite. Dogfighting is popular among nigger culture, they breed and raise dogs to attack each other and it's very abusive. So obviously the rescue-dogs that come from that upbringing are much more likely to bite.
What is the dog breed choice of dogfighters? The big, mean, monster dogs of course. Pit bulls. And I bet you will find boxers and rottweilers among the top most dangerous breeds too.
It's the owners, it's the nigger's fault. This is not a stat about "nigger-dogs", it's a stat showing yet another effect of niggers. Remove the niggers and the stat will change. Be more racist and less dogist. Dont be a dogophobe like the muslims lol
A pitbull can be a great dog if gotten as a puppy and trained right. That goes for any breed, really.
they don't know how to read.
also statistics are good if they make me more racist or radical overall.
First of all, TND is an unquestioned goal. None of this will change anything about that. The only question is how strong the parallels are with niggers and humans.
Second, just looking it up, it's clear that Pitbulls stand out by far as #1 in this: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/dog-attack-statistics-breed/ So it is completely out of question, so what the fuck is even your point?
Third, the image shows "all dogs" as the second column. Does it exclude Pitbulls? If not, it raises that value upwards a lot. So it's either that Pitbulls are vastly over-represented in bites against their owners, or even more over-represented than that.
> also statistics are good if they make me more racist or radical overall.
Actually good statistics make me more racist and radical overall, so... so what's even the point of this kikery?
I said that the people who own pits do not know how to read..
if they were to know, they wouldn't buy them.
my point is that statistics aren't bad or good, they just are.
ignoring them is bad, accepting them is good.
For example, let's take the fbi racial crime stats and turn them anti-racist by pointing out trends over the years and conveniently leaving out how Hispanics are mislabeled as white. Article headline reads: "*White crime on the rise while all nonwhites crime goes down.*" The article could include the actual fbi crime stats, but the vast majority of people won't click passed that headline.
they can be manipulated, i know.
but facts like, pits are 1% of dog breegs and commit 50% of kills is something kinda objective, and yeah, there is a statistic like this.. normies will ignore it and buy this nigger breed.
same for niggers, they love them.