I agree with everything you just said. Might I also add that there needs to be much tougher crackdowns on puppy mills, we know that dogs that come out of these types of facilities not only have many medical issues, but behavior issues as well. Breed banning just doesn't make any sense, I've known many bullies and they are wonderful dogs! Makes me wonder how many of these banned dogs will just be dropped off somewhere and left to fend for themselves. What a horrible situation for responsible owner and their beloved pets.
You are very correct. There's so much work to be done on educating people about where to source animals from. I have a series on what makes an excellent and ethical breeder from quite a while ago, trying to make that info also available for people. My heart breaks for the dogs, responsible guardians, and vet clinic staff who will suffer because of this legislation 💔
“The any dog can bite” is always ignored by the public. I have an American staffie and my old neighbor had a trio of collie/heeler dogs. They were unspayed and never trained or left the yard. They would go bonkers whenever we walked by, with my dog begging to walk across the street. One day, one of the dogs got out of the house and went for a delivery carrier. The carrier was injured badly and had to go the hospital. The dogs were removed and thankfully the family moved shortly after. But it seems that no one bat an eye because the dogs weren’t any bully type dog. 🤦🏼♀️
In the USA, many cities did this ban based on bite statistics, but if you look at statistics throughout the years 1950s to now, you see the breeds have changed from German shepherds, to Dobermans, to bullies. Each year was the fashionable/ trending breed of guard dogs. Back when GS's were popular guard dogs, they were the top statistical biters even though many people had bullies. Singular dogs' attitudes depend on the owners
You are correct - the breeds being focused on have changed over the decades. I really hope that we eventually stop breed specific legislation as it's so very clear it doesn't work.
It seems to me that dogs have more rights than people. After a violent dog attack where someone’s hand is about to get amputated they’ll try to rehome the dog or do a tolerance test instead of putting it down.. What do you think about non-kill shelters in theory it sounds good however have you thought of the fact that they’re just shuffling and rehoming violent and vicious dogs. The dog is too vicious. They will send it to another state, kind of like tile washing for cars. wouldn’t it be better for shelters to have the facilities and food and care for dogs that are non-vicious and that can actually find a forever home? It just seems asinine to try to rehome a violent dog. Instead of giving it the sweet kiss of death dogs don’t deserve a second or third chance sometimes especially if it’s a big violent dog. Furthermore, is it fair for an unwanted older dog or a violent dog to spend out the rest of its day in a kennel when space could be used for a dog that would more easily be adopted out?
I think it’s good to spay or neuter, and I think it should be at cost. So MANY bully breeds and mixes are up for adoption and homeless in shelters. They have large litters of puppies. My daughter found one sitting in the middle of a road and puppies running everywhere. She was with us for 14 years and although not a perfect dog, she was perfect for us. She was a great Nanny dog when our first tiny granddaughter was born. We spayed her because we disliked seeing so MANY Pitties in SHELTERS.
The regulation is BS, if you ban one 'impressive' dog breed, certain people will buy another non-banned 'impressive' dog, and aren't capable to raise them properly. In the Netherlands, they are trying to make it a law which requires people to take an online course before buying a dog. Not sure if that is the best route, however, it is a start to educate people before buying a dog and hopefully gives them more understanding about dog behavior, dog demands, and dog life.
Doing a course first is a far better idea than breed specific legislation. I hadn't heard that the Netherlands was considering that, but now I will go and look into it! Thank you for letting me know!
We used to have to hold licences to own a dog in the UK. At the very least people should have to complete basic training before owning and when first owning dogs. Sounds like the proposal in the Netherlands is a step in the right direction. This new law is a typical UK Government knee jerk reaction.
Thanks for your very sensible thoughts on this. I think it’s important to note that the ban is in England and Wales only, which has now created an opening for people to think it’s a good idea to transport these dogs to Scotland, and very possibly Ireland. Already crowded shelters in Scotland are being asked to take in and rehome these dogs, which is difficult to do given the level of responsibility and training requirements that are needed. Less responsible people are bringing them to Scotland and leaving them in different environments with friends/acquaintances/family members who have zero experience of working with this type of breed. This legislation has been a down right knee jerk, lazy response to show that they are ‘doing’ something - but in the cheapest way possible, with no experience or forward thinking, or thoughts of consequences.
I had assumed XL bully was an actual breed with how I heard it discussed. This ban seems especially clumsy when it's just targeting a certain look of dog, and I can't help but find it somewhat disheartening that controlling aesthetic traits like muscular builds has more legislative momentum behind it than traits that cause medical harm to the dog (severe brachycephaly being the obvious example).
You said that your issue is that the description of the XL bully as they state it, is the same description of a lot of dog breeds. What really bothers me is that I haven’t seen 1 single XL bully , that has been accused of these crimes . This is very serious, the label that these dogs now have to bare without proper identification is just ridiculous. Honestly every attack that I’ve seen looks kinda blurry BUT I can tell that none of them looked like an XL bully.
Thank you for this thorough video. I agree to the most part but sadly I have had 3 bad experiences and all three were a bully type breed, and one after the owner said “she’s friendly” In my state, you cannot find homeowners insurance if you have this breed. Vacation rentals will not take them, Rottweilers etc. My daughter manages a huge shelter in Florida. Majority are pit bulls or bully mixes. Down there, many bred to fight and kill or used for bait dogs and left at her shelter when no longer useful. Many are adopted and returned because people do not realize how energetic they are and do not or cannot exercise them enough. You may be right but when I’m out walking my golden and I see one of these, I walk the other way.
I rescue and foster pittbulls, staffys and the like and never been bit. Tried to rescue a chihuahua and got bit severely .. it’s not a breed issue it’s a human issue
This is such a bummer. I thought studies demonstrating that even dog "experts" are not very "good" at identifying breeds and that dog bites don't decrease when breed bans are in effect were starting to make people rethink breed bans. We need to stop blaming "breed" and look at "dangerous dogs". And you're completely correct--this could apply to so many breeds. This could easily apply to Great Danes, Mastiffs, and many other breeds that don't have any "bully" in them at all. This is really sad news.
Dog bites can happen with any breed. I foster dogs and my heeler/shepherds that I've fostered have all been way more nippy than the pitties I've fostered. However, dog bites don't always have the same consequences. A chihauha bite isn't nearly as bad as a pitbull bite. I also feel like we might need some targeted legislation just because pits are 70%-90% of the dogs that end up long term shelter residents. Now, I don't think BSL as we are currently doing it is correct, but I do think that pitbull breeders should be scruitinzed way more than say, poodle breeders, because there is a greater social cost for breeding more pitties.
@@VetMedCorner Surely you don't need a peer-reviewed paper that shows Chihuahua bites are less severe than pitbull bites? And you don't find it incredibly misleading to measure "bites" and not maulings that result in life-altering injuries and fatalities? What about the number of "bites"? So if a paper refuses to discuss the nature of these attacks, and only discusses "bites", we can't make any assessments beyond this criteria? I would absolutely love to see statistics regarding more than one bite, which indicates more of an attack than a "bite" due to other factors like fear and poor socialization. We can't sit here and deny the likely statistical increase of higher "gameness" in certain phenotypes/lines because there's no paper.
This comment means so much to me - I put in hours and hours reading research papers and expert consensus statements etc when forming each video, and I try incredibly hard to present fair, accurate, research based, information. It's an incredible amount of work, but when I know there are people who appreciate it, that's very encouraging 💜
The fact that nature is continuous, the fact that “breeds” and even “species” can’t be said to exist, the fact that people stereotype, the fact that people can’t identify dog breeds… none of these things disprove the idea that the tendency towards aggression is heritable in these dogs. Anecdotally, we had a staffy called Sam. She wouldn’t hurt a fly and would break up fights. But her male relatives, raised in the same household, were genuinely scary to be around. One was later seized and killed for biting a neighbour. It’s not simple, there’s individual variation, genetic recombination and many other variables. But that some dogs are inherently more risky than others by nature to me seems to be true. So the idea people who are compassionate towards animals have that it’s always and everywhere the trainer and owner’s fault is naive too. Those same people wouldn’t advocate living amongst lions or bears because they see violence there as “natural.” But they become pure behaviorists when dogs are involved. A good comparison with humans is this: Norway’s more humane justice system reduced recidivism from 50% to 20% but that 20% it seems simply cannot be reformed into good citizens in the best justice system and most benevolent Skinner box in the world. I don’t know what the solution is and I’m happy you provided several improvements to the legislation rather than just criticising it. My main point is just that there are naive and stereotyping folks on both sides of this debate.
Apologies for this not being clear. Anything that negatively impacts a group of people always negatively impacts marginalized people more- the intersections of racism, sexism, ableism etc. are always present in social issues. Additionally, law-enforcement has historically been disproportionately enforced against racialized and poor people. ETA - thank you for asking the question! I appreciate when people are thinking critically about issues.
This comment of yours demonstrates just how much work you have to do. Do some work learning about rascism, sexism and ableism to start with, and then come back to this subject.
@@VetMedCorner You didn't answer the question @philmccraken179 asked. As someone who also dislikes dogs, I have the same question: why must WE be forced to endure them in public spaces? I can't recreate anywhere without carrying pepper spray because I've been menaced by off-leash dogs so many times (and I was bitten on 2 separate occasions while trail running on public lands 20+ years ago), and that's one of many reasons I went from liking them to despising them. I see them in grocery stores, coffeeshops, and other spaces they have NO business being. Their biohazardous waste is everywhere, because owners are too lazy to pick up after their dogs. Also, it's really presumptuous and offensive of you to assume he doesn't know about racism, sexism and ableism...none of which have anything to do with bully breed ownership (which is what you basically said in your video). If someone can't afford to get their dog neutered, spayed and vaccinated, or vet care, they can't afford to own a dog. That's kind of the most fundamental aspect of being a so-called "responsible dog owner", wouldn't you agree? Has nothing to do with race, gender or any other immutable quality. Last I checked, pet ownership was not a constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT, but a privilege and lifestyle choice. No one is being discriminated against because they are being kept from owning a breed type that is disproportionately responsible for severe maulings and fatal attacks of humans. In fact, NO ONE needs to own one of these abominations, and quite frankly, there is no reason for them to exist: they should be sterilized and euthanized out of existence. As a physician and surgeon in my professional life, I'm obviously skilled in giving injections, and would be happy to volunteer for administrating pentobarbitol injections for any culled bully breeds if you vets are too ethically bothered by it. And, I get that you're deeply mired in your own confirmation bias, but you should consider expanding out of your closed mindset about dogs, and bully breeds. And maybe, just maybe, show a little bit more concern for the welfare and safety of your fellow humans over keeping a bunch of useless, dangerous and potentially deadly animals alive...animals that disproportionally harm the very groups you claim to be so concerned about: poor people, minorities, children and women. These groups are often forced to live with, or in neighborhoods where the garbage owners of these garbage dogs live. Also, were you aware that studies have been done that show that people that are attracted to owning vicious dog breeds, like the XL bully, are more likely to be social deviants and have engaged in criminal behavior? I'm guessing not. Here's a good summary article about one of the bigger studies from the Journal of Forensic Sciences: mentalhealthdaily.com/2023/11/20/owners-vicious-dog-breeds-pit-bulls-criminal-behaviors-antisocial-traits/ Here's a .pdf of a study from the J. of Interpersonal Violence, by J. Barnes, et. al, that looks at the ownership of vicious dog breeds as a marker for social deviant behavior: www.dogsbite.org/pdf/2006-ownership-high-risk-dogs-marker-deviant-behavior.pdf Have you read this Harvard study showing enlarged amygdalae in breeds bred for aggression? Here you go, full article: projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/evolutionaryneurosciencelab/files/hecht2019_neuroanatomicalvariationdogbreeds.pdf Based on these research studies, it seems pretty clear to me that it's both an "owner and breed" problem. It's also worth noting that these same social deviants are more likely to neglect and abuse their dogs. Banning bully breeds solves several societal problems. So, perhaps take a bit of your own advice, do some work reading these studies, and get back to us once you have learned a few things and hopefully updated your priors. As a professional, you should be willing to follow the data and science, and not your emotions and biases.
I agree with everything you just said. Might I also add that there needs to be much tougher crackdowns on puppy mills, we know that dogs that come out of these types of facilities not only have many medical issues, but behavior issues as well. Breed banning just doesn't make any sense, I've known many bullies and they are wonderful dogs! Makes me wonder how many of these banned dogs will just be dropped off somewhere and left to fend for themselves. What a horrible situation for responsible owner and their beloved pets.
You are very correct. There's so much work to be done on educating people about where to source animals from.
I have a series on what makes an excellent and ethical breeder from quite a while ago, trying to make that info also available for people.
My heart breaks for the dogs, responsible guardians, and vet clinic staff who will suffer because of this legislation 💔
Incident in Derbyshire last week . They then tried to give the dog away the day after on the face book !!!!!
“The any dog can bite” is always ignored by the public. I have an American staffie and my old neighbor had a trio of collie/heeler dogs. They were unspayed and never trained or left the yard. They would go bonkers whenever we walked by, with my dog begging to walk across the street. One day, one of the dogs got out of the house and went for a delivery carrier. The carrier was injured badly and had to go the hospital. The dogs were removed and thankfully the family moved shortly after. But it seems that no one bat an eye because the dogs weren’t any bully type dog. 🤦🏼♀️
Those stories are incredibly common. It frustrates me an awful lot. I hope the delivery carrier recovered fully 😔
In the USA, many cities did this ban based on bite statistics, but if you look at statistics throughout the years 1950s to now, you see the breeds have changed from German shepherds, to Dobermans, to bullies. Each year was the fashionable/ trending breed of guard dogs. Back when GS's were popular guard dogs, they were the top statistical biters even though many people had bullies. Singular dogs' attitudes depend on the owners
You are correct - the breeds being focused on have changed over the decades. I really hope that we eventually stop breed specific legislation as it's so very clear it doesn't work.
It seems to me that dogs have more rights than people. After a violent dog attack where someone’s hand is about to get amputated they’ll try to rehome the dog or do a tolerance test instead of putting it down..
What do you think about non-kill shelters in theory it sounds good however have you thought of the fact that they’re just shuffling and rehoming violent and vicious dogs. The dog is too vicious. They will send it to another state, kind of like tile washing for cars. wouldn’t it be better for shelters to have the facilities and food and care for dogs that are non-vicious and that can actually find a forever home? It just seems asinine to try to rehome a violent dog. Instead of giving it the sweet kiss of death dogs don’t deserve a second or third chance sometimes especially if it’s a big violent dog. Furthermore, is it fair for an unwanted older dog or a violent dog to spend out the rest of its day in a kennel when space could be used for a dog that would more easily be adopted out?
I think it’s good to spay or neuter, and I think it should be at cost. So MANY bully breeds and mixes are up for adoption and homeless in shelters. They have large litters of puppies. My daughter found one sitting in the middle of a road and puppies running everywhere. She was with us for 14 years and although not a perfect dog, she was perfect for us. She was a great Nanny dog when our first tiny granddaughter was born. We spayed her because we disliked seeing so MANY Pitties in SHELTERS.
Got a staff. But a nice build 22 inch. Live in the uk... My stomach is churning
Oof - I imagine it's incredibly distressing. I'm so sorry 💔
Am with you
The regulation is BS, if you ban one 'impressive' dog breed, certain people will buy another non-banned 'impressive' dog, and aren't capable to raise them properly. In the Netherlands, they are trying to make it a law which requires people to take an online course before buying a dog. Not sure if that is the best route, however, it is a start to educate people before buying a dog and hopefully gives them more understanding about dog behavior, dog demands, and dog life.
Doing a course first is a far better idea than breed specific legislation. I hadn't heard that the Netherlands was considering that, but now I will go and look into it! Thank you for letting me know!
Hi would that be the wolfdog breeds...
We used to have to hold licences to own a dog in the UK. At the very least people should have to complete basic training before owning and when first owning dogs. Sounds like the proposal in the Netherlands is a step in the right direction.
This new law is a typical UK Government knee jerk reaction.
Thanks for your very sensible thoughts on this. I think it’s important to note that the ban is in England and Wales only, which has now created an opening for people to think it’s a good idea to transport these dogs to Scotland, and very possibly Ireland. Already crowded shelters in Scotland are being asked to take in and rehome these dogs, which is difficult to do given the level of responsibility and training requirements that are needed. Less responsible people are bringing them to Scotland and leaving them in different environments with friends/acquaintances/family members who have zero experience of working with this type of breed.
This legislation has been a down right knee jerk, lazy response to show that they are ‘doing’ something - but in the cheapest way possible, with no experience or forward thinking, or thoughts of consequences.
Thank you for clarifying this - I really appreciate the additional detail. It's such a horrible piece of legislation 😩
@@VetMedCorner Sadly Scotland has now jumped on the bandwagon with this.
Thank you for bringing attention to this issue and for highlighting the disproportionate impact on marginalized people
I had assumed XL bully was an actual breed with how I heard it discussed. This ban seems especially clumsy when it's just targeting a certain look of dog, and I can't help but find it somewhat disheartening that controlling aesthetic traits like muscular builds has more legislative momentum behind it than traits that cause medical harm to the dog (severe brachycephaly being the obvious example).
Same - it's incredibly upsetting 😞
You said that your issue is that the description of the XL bully as they state it, is the same description of a lot of dog breeds.
What really bothers me is that I haven’t seen 1 single XL bully , that has been accused of these crimes .
This is very serious, the label that these dogs now have to bare without proper identification is just ridiculous.
Honestly every attack that I’ve seen looks kinda blurry BUT I can tell that none of them looked like an XL bully.
There's so so so many problems with how the legislation is set up. It's a disaster 😔
Thank you for this thorough video. I agree to the most part but sadly I have had 3 bad experiences and all three were a bully type breed, and one after the owner said “she’s friendly”
In my state, you cannot find homeowners insurance if you have this breed. Vacation rentals will not take them, Rottweilers etc.
My daughter manages a huge shelter in Florida. Majority are pit bulls or bully mixes. Down there, many bred to fight and kill or used for bait dogs and left at her shelter when no longer useful. Many are adopted and returned because people do not realize how energetic they are and do not or cannot exercise them enough. You may be right but when I’m out walking my golden and I see one of these, I walk the other way.
I rescue and foster pittbulls, staffys and the like and never been bit. Tried to rescue a chihuahua and got bit severely .. it’s not a breed issue it’s a human issue
I'm from the UK, lots of charities and vets are offering free sterilisation to XLs all England.
This is such a bummer. I thought studies demonstrating that even dog "experts" are not very "good" at identifying breeds and that dog bites don't decrease when breed bans are in effect were starting to make people rethink breed bans. We need to stop blaming "breed" and look at "dangerous dogs". And you're completely correct--this could apply to so many breeds. This could easily apply to Great Danes, Mastiffs, and many other breeds that don't have any "bully" in them at all. This is really sad news.
It's so incredibly upsetting 😥
I was hoping we were making headway too... -sigh-
Dog bites can happen with any breed. I foster dogs and my heeler/shepherds that I've fostered have all been way more nippy than the pitties I've fostered. However, dog bites don't always have the same consequences. A chihauha bite isn't nearly as bad as a pitbull bite. I also feel like we might need some targeted legislation just because pits are 70%-90% of the dogs that end up long term shelter residents. Now, I don't think BSL as we are currently doing it is correct, but I do think that pitbull breeders should be scruitinzed way more than say, poodle breeders, because there is a greater social cost for breeding more pitties.
Could you share the peer reviewed, published research studies that demonstrate your claims?
All breeders who do not perform OFA (or equivalent) genetic, hip and elbow testing and certification should be scrutinized.
@@VetMedCorner Surely you don't need a peer-reviewed paper that shows Chihuahua bites are less severe than pitbull bites? And you don't find it incredibly misleading to measure "bites" and not maulings that result in life-altering injuries and fatalities? What about the number of "bites"? So if a paper refuses to discuss the nature of these attacks, and only discusses "bites", we can't make any assessments beyond this criteria? I would absolutely love to see statistics regarding more than one bite, which indicates more of an attack than a "bite" due to other factors like fear and poor socialization. We can't sit here and deny the likely statistical increase of higher "gameness" in certain phenotypes/lines because there's no paper.
Feel free to share the research that backs up your claims
Yep, our French Mastiff mix would be banned. The biggest problem with breed bans is they don't address the issue, irresponsible owners.
💯
Bsl does not work simple , you covered all aspects reasons brilliantly 👏
Thank you for your kind comment 😊
Thank you for one of the only considered takes I've heard on this.
This comment means so much to me - I put in hours and hours reading research papers and expert consensus statements etc when forming each video, and I try incredibly hard to present fair, accurate, research based, information.
It's an incredible amount of work, but when I know there are people who appreciate it, that's very encouraging 💜
The fact that nature is continuous, the fact that “breeds” and even “species” can’t be said to exist, the fact that people stereotype, the fact that people can’t identify dog breeds… none of these things disprove the idea that the tendency towards aggression is heritable in these dogs.
Anecdotally, we had a staffy called Sam. She wouldn’t hurt a fly and would break up fights. But her male relatives, raised in the same household, were genuinely scary to be around. One was later seized and killed for biting a neighbour.
It’s not simple, there’s individual variation, genetic recombination and many other variables. But that some dogs are inherently more risky than others by nature to me seems to be true. So the idea people who are compassionate towards animals have that it’s always and everywhere the trainer and owner’s fault is naive too. Those same people wouldn’t advocate living amongst lions or bears because they see violence there as “natural.” But they become pure behaviorists when dogs are involved.
A good comparison with humans is this: Norway’s more humane justice system reduced recidivism from 50% to 20% but that 20% it seems simply cannot be reformed into good citizens in the best justice system and most benevolent Skinner box in the world.
I don’t know what the solution is and I’m happy you provided several improvements to the legislation rather than just criticising it. My main point is just that there are naive and stereotyping folks on both sides of this debate.
Rishi can now add this appalling legislation to his train wreck of a premiership. Slow clap till he is removed in May.
My American XL Bully is so friendly.
NO NEED TO BREED SUCH BIG DOGS
52 cm high is big?
my dog is the same height she is way smaller then German Shepherds
Superb podcast. I will link It every time I see an uninformed comment on this appalling legislation. Thank you.
Thank you - that means so much to me ☺️
They should of banned the Xl bully from owning the idiot owner🙃 .would not me in this mess now 🙈
Dr. Em, I wish you could expand more on racial minorities being affected? I didn't quite get the point at 2:30
Apologies for this not being clear.
Anything that negatively impacts a group of people always negatively impacts marginalized people more- the intersections of racism, sexism, ableism etc. are always present in social issues.
Additionally, law-enforcement has historically been disproportionately enforced against racialized and poor people.
ETA - thank you for asking the question! I appreciate when people are thinking critically about issues.
@@VetMedCorner Ah, I see, I was making sure I understood correctly. Thanks for the reply!
This comment of yours demonstrates just how much work you have to do. Do some work learning about rascism, sexism and ableism to start with, and then come back to this subject.
@@VetMedCorner You didn't answer the question @philmccraken179 asked.
As someone who also dislikes dogs, I have the same question: why must WE be forced to endure them in public spaces? I can't recreate anywhere without carrying pepper spray because I've been menaced by off-leash dogs so many times (and I was bitten on 2 separate occasions while trail running on public lands 20+ years ago), and that's one of many reasons I went from liking them to despising them. I see them in grocery stores, coffeeshops, and other spaces they have NO business being. Their biohazardous waste is everywhere, because owners are too lazy to pick up after their dogs.
Also, it's really presumptuous and offensive of you to assume he doesn't know about racism, sexism and ableism...none of which have anything to do with bully breed ownership (which is what you basically said in your video). If someone can't afford to get their dog neutered, spayed and vaccinated, or vet care, they can't afford to own a dog. That's kind of the most fundamental aspect of being a so-called "responsible dog owner", wouldn't you agree? Has nothing to do with race, gender or any other immutable quality.
Last I checked, pet ownership was not a constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT, but a privilege and lifestyle choice. No one is being discriminated against because they are being kept from owning a breed type that is disproportionately responsible for severe maulings and fatal attacks of humans. In fact, NO ONE needs to own one of these abominations, and quite frankly, there is no reason for them to exist: they should be sterilized and euthanized out of existence. As a physician and surgeon in my professional life, I'm obviously skilled in giving injections, and would be happy to volunteer for administrating pentobarbitol injections for any culled bully breeds if you vets are too ethically bothered by it.
And, I get that you're deeply mired in your own confirmation bias, but you should consider expanding out of your closed mindset about dogs, and bully breeds. And maybe, just maybe, show a little bit more concern for the welfare and safety of your fellow humans over keeping a bunch of useless, dangerous and potentially deadly animals alive...animals that disproportionally harm the very groups you claim to be so concerned about: poor people, minorities, children and women. These groups are often forced to live with, or in neighborhoods where the garbage owners of these garbage dogs live.
Also, were you aware that studies have been done that show that people that are attracted to owning vicious dog breeds, like the XL bully, are more likely to be social deviants and have engaged in criminal behavior? I'm guessing not. Here's a good summary article about one of the bigger studies from the Journal of Forensic Sciences:
mentalhealthdaily.com/2023/11/20/owners-vicious-dog-breeds-pit-bulls-criminal-behaviors-antisocial-traits/
Here's a .pdf of a study from the J. of Interpersonal Violence, by J. Barnes, et. al, that looks at the ownership of vicious dog breeds as a marker for social deviant behavior:
www.dogsbite.org/pdf/2006-ownership-high-risk-dogs-marker-deviant-behavior.pdf
Have you read this Harvard study showing enlarged amygdalae in breeds bred for aggression? Here you go, full article:
projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/evolutionaryneurosciencelab/files/hecht2019_neuroanatomicalvariationdogbreeds.pdf
Based on these research studies, it seems pretty clear to me that it's both an "owner and breed" problem. It's also worth noting that these same social deviants are more likely to neglect and abuse their dogs. Banning bully breeds solves several societal problems.
So, perhaps take a bit of your own advice, do some work reading these studies, and get back to us once you have learned a few things and hopefully updated your priors. As a professional, you should be willing to follow the data and science, and not your emotions and biases.