Pit bulls have created a bad reputation throughout the years, but is it really their fault? This breed of dog can be harmful, or harmless, depending on how they are raised. Although they are the most lethally aggressive when trained to be, it isn’t really up to the dogs themselves, but to the people who own them. Should people be able to own pit bulls? Or does it cause more harm and disorder for others who don’t own any pit bulls? The original pit bulls were called “bull terriers” which were a cross between a bulldog and an English terrier. Although pit bulls were formerly bred for dog fighting, they were the least vicious towards humans and children. They were in fact nicknamed “nanny dogs” because of their kindness towards the younger children. Pit bulls officially arrived in the US in the 1800’s, they soon became one of the most popular breeds of that time. President Roosevelt and Laura Ingalls both owned pit bulls, and even the postage stamp of Helen Keller featured a pit bull lying at her feet. Moreover, they were quite symbolic to America at the time, they appeared in several World War 1, pro-USA posters, draped in red, white, and blue (Man’s Best Friend?). Pit bulls are not the only …show more content…
While most would see their high tolerance pain as a negative trait, this makes them more valuable as family dogs because they can put up with the rough play that occur with children. Pit bulls are not the most vicious breed of dog despite what people think, they tested the highest in temperament at 82% but the average score for any dogs is 77%. According to Sarah Logan Wilson’s article about pit bull facts, someone is 200 times more likely to die from taking aspirin than to be fatally attacked by a pit bull. Pit bull attacks are not as common as social media makes it sound like, in fact, social media has been feeding the world all the negative stories about pit bulls