On Tuesday, December 20, staff and students at Willard Intermediate South school were injured when two dogs identified as a pit bull mix breed made their way into the playground.
That's not a fucking pitbull then IS IT?!
The dogs were euthanized in order to be tested for rabies. The tests will be completed today, and we expect to have results within the next couple of days. During the investigation, it was determined that one of the dogs was not vaccinated and no proof could be provided that the other was up to date on its vaccinations.
So it could've been rabies but you go straight to the bullshit bioessentialism and insinuation that genetics can predispose one to violence.
Obligatory link to my effort post on this phenomenon (reddit link because the OG here is in archive limbo)
Hell I'd argue small dogs by and large are more aggressive because no one bothers to train them because what's the worst that could happen but the actual physical ability seems very important and also a genuinely good argument for legislation? I can't football-kick a pitbull like a chihuaha.
I don't have too much of an opinion of US Pitbull Ownership or legislation but "actual real life consequences of what if it goes wrong" is taken into most legislations, this seems like a bad argument. You need a driving license for a car, a harder one for anything bigger and none at all for a bicycle. Or why an AR-15 is easier to get legally than a rocket launcher.
Okay but then you get into how that could possibly be implemented and a dog is not a car. They have coevolved with us for tens of thousands of years.
Size / Weight? It's not like a german sheperd coming for you is any less dangerous
Okay but that is the sort of thing that can't be addressed in any way within our current racist capitalist hegemony without disproportionally affecting minorities.
Again I stress the reference to the book The Black Man's Dog.
If you wear clothes you're probably exploiting children, but you can't just not wear clothes.
And sure you can not own dogs but then the argument becomes should you just not own dogs? Okay, but should we also allow all these animals to be put down because nobody will adopt them?
It's a very complex issue and people are bringing up things like this that have nothing to do with the issue at hand that there is a resurgence of scientific racism and this is a part of that.
On the one hand: I'd say make that argument then, on the other hand I think as a leftists you kind of have to grapple with the realities of living in a stupid, unfair system and still needing some legislation as for, let's put it generally, risk containment. I don't have the numbers to argue as to whether dog attacks constitutes a problem here, just generally.
Traffic enforcement is done way, WAY more against black people, which is bad, but abolishing any sort of traffic enforcement is also bad. Ideally you'd solve this via infrastructure, but if you start tomorrow with the biggest program ever seen to rebuild the world, you're still looking at two decades of needing traffic enforcement.
I think you should just stop any commercial breeding and require pets to be neutered / spayed and go for like phase out, mostly, excluding things like Service and Therapy Animals and probably some of the better job uses like rescue dogs.
I think people are getting into the weeds about how to handle a problem that is being manufactured by reactionary media to drive a narrative around bioessentialist notions of behavior that is directly tied to race science.
Eyes on the ball people this is very insidious and people are making light of it or being dismissive of how insidious this truly is.