The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Intentional breeding of pit bulls should be illegal in the USA.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 228 times Debate No: 82457
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




I Pro will contend for the resolution.
Con against the resolution.

This is a normative resolution.

"Full Definition of PIT BULL
: a dog (as an American Staffordshire terrier) of any of several breeds or a real or apparent hybrid with one or more of these breeds that was developed and is now often trained for fighting and is noted for strength and stamina
: an aggressive and tenacious person "[1]

I contend that pit bulls are a menace to society and should not be bred. Its common knowledge that pit bulls are highly aggressive.



I will be accepting the debate in favor that the pit bull breed is perfectly fine and the breeding of this specific group of dogs should be perfectly legal for there is rarely an instance in which you hear about a member of the pit bull family attacking or killing their owner.

I will turn this over to pro for their side of the debate and I look forward to having a great debate with you.
Debate Round No. 1


First there was some ambiguity about the word "breed" mentioned in the comments.

Breed " 1.
to produce (offspring); procreate; engender.
to produce by mating; propagate sexually; reproduce:
Ten mice were bred in the laboratory.

to raise (cattle, sheep, etc.):
He breeds longhorns on the ranch." [2].

No, pit bulls aren't a recognized breed [3]. "The term "pit bull" is most commonly used to refer to the following dogs that originate from combining bulldogs with terriers:

The American Pit Bull Terrier - recognized by the United Kennel Club (UKC) and the American Dog Breeders' Association (ADBA)
The American Staffordshire Terrier - recognized by the American Kennel Club (AKC)
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier - recognized by both the UKC and the AKC

Yet, pit bulls come into existence somehow. Other than cloning, I don't see any other way a pit bull could come into existence other than accidental or deliberate breeding. Cloning is not part of the resolution and thus is irrelevant.

Claim 1: Pit-bulls like any other dog can be kind and gentle.
Warrant: Caesar Millon Dog Whisper [4].
Impact: This is in-case Con takes the angle that all pit-bulls should be euthanized in lieu of banning intentional breeding.

Claim 2: There are many other dog breeds other than pit-bulls
Warrant: Looking at the AKC website [5].
Impact: There is no shortage of dog breeds, if this breed no longer existed there would be little impact on the world. Unhappiness generated by the resolution would be minimal.

Claim 3: Pit-bulls have killed other dogs.
Warrant: Common knowledge, you can't not know this fact.
Impact 3: Pit-bulls scare people. People love their dogs. Human unhappiness is caused by pit-bull attacks on other dogs. Unhappiness would be prevented with less pit-bulls.

Claim 4: Pit-bulls have injured humans
Warrant: "In 1994, the most recent year for which published data are available, an estimated 4.7 million dog bites occurred in the United States, and approximately 799,700 persons required medical care (1). Of an estimated 333,700 patients treated for dog bites in emergency departments (EDs) in 1994 (2), approximately 6,000 (1.8%) were hospitalized " [6].
Impact: See impact 3.

Claim 5: Pit-bulls have killed humans
Warrant: "Fatal attacks by these breeds of dogs (1979-1998):
Pit Bulls: 66" [7].
Impact: See impact 3.

Claim 6: Pit-bulls are more likely to kill than most other breeds.
Warrant: "When we divide the population by the fatal attacks, we can get a percentage based on the dogs probability of fatally attacking a human.

Pit Bulls: .00125 %

Rottweilers: .00433 %

German Shepherds: .00217%

Chow: .00333%"[7].

Impact: See impact 3.

Thanks for the debate, I can't wait to read Con's response.



"This is in-case Con takes the angle that all pit-bulls should be euthanized in lieu of banning intentional breeding"
Euthanize - Put (a living being, especially a dog or cat) to death humanely.
I was not planning on taking the angle that a the pit-bull should be euthanized as opposed to being intentionally bred and while you did say that is just in-case, I do not see how that would be tied to the debate at hand.

"Pit-bulls scare people. People love their dogs. Human unhappiness is caused by pit-bull attacks on other dogs. Unhappiness would be prevented with less pit-bulls."
Pit-bulls do scare people but that is only because of the stereotype that is portrayed of them. When you think of any type of dog in the pit-bull family, you immediately think of this savage and ferocious creature that only wants to bring death and injury to those around it. However, a pit-bull is a dog that was once known as "a wonderful dog that is known for its intelligence, strength, and loyalty." [2]. I see a fault in your reasoning here for their are many causes for us humans to become unhappy such as being fired from a job, losing a loved one, or having something else tragic happen in your life. To add on to this, the possibility of a pit-bull attack on another dog is a rare instance and is most commonly caused by either the way the pit-bull was raised by its owner, did another dog attack it first, or did the owner sick the dog on to the other dog.

I also notice that in your 4th and 5th claim that you refer to the impact listed in your 3rd claim which again talks about how humans are scared of the stereotypes portrayed about pit-bulls. Your warrant, however, seems to be talking about dog bites make approximately 799,700 people every single year get medical treatment but you do not give a specific dog type that causes this number. This is on total the amount of people hospitalized but this is on all dogs combined, not just one lone dog.

In your 6th claim, you list out the numbers that show dog attacks which places the pit-bull family at the very bottom of the list and the rottweiler at the very top of the list. Here we can see that the rottweiler proves to be a bigger threat than that of the pit-bull family which puts an end to the idea that most dog attacks are occurred by pit-bulls.

Claim 1: The stereotypes that are portrayed of pit-bulls is what gives them a bad name
When people think of the word "pit-bull' they immediately think of a ferocious dog that wants to slaughter and rip anything that is in its path. Many people think of "dog fights" in which dogs are placed up against each other in a fight to the death which leaves the pit-bull family at the center of attention. However, the pit-bull family has not always been characterized by this. In recent years, the pit-bull has been characterized by these stereotypes rather than their true characteristics which describe them as being "a wonderful dog, well-known for its intelligence, strength, and loyalty." [2].

Importance: This will show that the reason that people are supposedly scared of pit bulls is because of the stereotypes that have been painted throughout the late 1900's to the early 2000's in which people think that this family of dogs only wants to bring injury and harm where ever it goes.

Claim 2: Humans are less likely to be fatally attacked by a pit-bull than many other things.
Pit-bulls are also described as being more likely to attack you and kill you than any other breed of dog. However, it was proven by Pro that the rottweiler will have a higher possibility of attacking you compared to a dog that is in the Pit-bull family which proves your theory wrong in which a pit-bull are more likely to kill than other breeds. People will often say that a pit-bull will kill someone that is smaller, a baby for example, due to its "aggressive state of mind". However, this is false due to the fact that approximately 50 babies die due to their cribs every year while 2 babies are killed by a pit-bull every year. A crib will kill 25x the amount of babies that a pit-bull will in one year [3].

Importance: This shows that a pit-bull is not more likely to kill something compared to other dogs as the poll that Pro shows that the pit-bull family is placed at the bottom of the list with .00125% and the rottweiler group at the very top with .00433. The pit-bull will also kill less people than everyday objects which is the reason the statistics with the baby deaths compared to the pit-bull family and the cribs.

Cribs - 50 deaths
Pit-bulls - 2 deaths

This is the chart that was used by Pro:
Pit Bulls: .00125 %

Rottweilers: .00433 %

German Shepherds: .00217%

Chow: .00333%"

Debate Round No. 2


Con's argument seems to be based upon that a few other breeds of dogs are more likely to cause a fatal attack upon humans and other causes of death are more likely. This is completely true. Yet, let's take the example of a bank robber who shoots and kills the bank teller. Do police officers stand around and say gee "About 610,000 people die of heart disease in the United States every year–that’s 1 in every 4 deaths.1" [8]. Therefore, we should not bother to chase down the killer. No, law enforcement officers don't ignore murder suspects due to heart disease causing more deaths and for good reason.

Now let's take the example of pit-bulls. Just because a few breeds kill more humans, doesn't mean pit-bulls should be ignored.

Next, Con takes the point of view of sterotypes. Pro agrees there is some sterotypes with pit-bulls and not enough attention brought to the other breeds like German Shepherds which are more likely to kill. In opposition is the dauchshund and the chihuahua. If pit-bulls were truely a victim of a smear campaign, then wouldn't dauchshunds and chihuahuas kill about as many humans as pit-bulls?

Searching the internet I could find no claims of a chihuahua ever killing any human. [9] Only two claims of a dauchshund fataly injuring a human. One fatal attack by a dauchund a Labrador Retriever-mix was also invovled. [10].

If this was truely a matter of sterotype chihuahua and dauchsunds would kill approx. the same amount of people as Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, German Shepherds, and Chow. If you ever watch Cesar Millian Dog Whisper you will see plenty of out of control small breeds. Yet, despite being out of control chihuahua never seem to kill humans. Blaming the human can only go so far.

Ban intentional breeding of pit-bulls, this breed needs to end sooner or later. Vote Pro.




Pro retaliates against Con's argument by using the example of a chihuahua and a dachshund, two very small sized dogs compared to the ferocious pit-bull. How can you even compare the three as the pit-bull was made to be a ferocious, strong, and independent dog compared to the small chihuahua and the long-bodied dachshund that, as Pro stated, has only killed two people compared to the bigger sized dogs such as the pit-bull, German Shepard, and rottweiler. The three types of dogs have nothing in common except for the fact that all three of them are dogs as the pit-bull is a whole lot stronger and fiercer compared to the chihuahua and the dachshund.

The international breeding of pit-bulls is perfectly fine as there is not commonly an instance in which a member of the pit-bull family will "randomly" attack someone unless provoked.

Sorry for keeping this round short as the round argument was not the longest in the world which allowed me to set up the conclusion fairly quickly.

Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by WAM 11 months ago
Pit Bulls aren't a breed, which means that you cannot 'breed' them.
No votes have been placed for this debate.