Another pitbull kills, this time a little girl

[Raven01]

Remember folks: By saying that pitbulls are dangerous I am NOT saying they are evil monsters. I am merely, as a Biologist, stating the facts which means that certain considerations must be taken when dealing with these animals. Not just pitbulls-any dog, any animal that has numerous reported incidents of killing/attacking people.

If you are a biologist I will eat my hat. Your argument scrupulously avoids scientific methodology and empirical evidence.
If you are a biologist, the school that granted the degree school be ashamed.
Pitbulls(besides not actually being a breed) are not the dog most likely to bite.

If you look here:
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil...lation-bsl-faq
you will find:
"All of the following national organizations oppose BSL: American Animal Hospital Association, American Dog Owner's Association, American Humane Association, American Kennel Club, American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, American Veterinary Medical Association, Association of Pet Dog Trainers, Best Friends Animal Society, Canadian Kennel Club, Humane Society of the United States, International Association of Canine Professionals, National Animal Control Association, National Animal Interest Alliance, and National Association of Obedience Instructors."
All groups whose opinion I find more reliable than that of a "biologist" that doesn't even adhere to scientific methods and evidence.

"Q. Aren't certain breeds of dogs more likely to injure or bite than others?
No. There is no scientific evidence that one kind of dog is more likely than any other to injure a human being.[1] In fact, there is evidence to the contrary.[2] A recent survey of the controlled study of dog bites covering 40 years and two continents concluded that no group of dogs should be considered disproportionately dangerous.[3]



Q. Does BSL reduce dog bites?
No. BSL has not succeeded in reducing dog bite-related injuries wherever in the world it has been enacted.

• 
  
  • 
    
    • 
      
      • 
        
        • 
          
          • • An analysis published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association explains why BSL does not reduce serious dog bites. The authors calculated the absurdly large numbers of dogs of targeted breeds who would have to be completely removed from a community in order to prevent even one serious dog bite-related injury. For example, in order to prevent a single hospitalization resulting from a dog bite, the authors calculate that a city or town would have to remove more than 100,000 dogs of a targeted group. To prevent a second hospitalization, double that number.[4]
      
      

• Denver, CO enacted a breed ban in 1989. Citizens of Denver continue to suffer a higher rate of hospitalization from dog bite-related injuries after the ban, than the citizens of breed-neutral Colorado counties[5]"