[From “Pit Bulls & NAXALT”]

Statistically speaking, the most aggressive dog in the world is the chihuahua[…]Death by chihuahua is extraordinarily unlikely[…]Pit bulls[…]are not so easy to dismiss. As of 2019, 91% of all fatal dog attacks were committed by a pit bull[…]
Now come the pit bull apologists[…]It does not negate the inherent threat of a fatal attack likely to be committed by a pit bull

No one really fears the more aggressive chihuahua because they are not known to kill people. Pit bulls, by contrast, should be feared[…]
Extrapolate this more widely. If a particular race of people were statistically less likely to be apprehended for certain violent crimes than other races, it would be reasonable to assume they were less dangerous. But if that same race of people was responsible for 60% of homicides, it would also be reasonable to observe and treat that race with caution. In other words, just because a race may be less likely to engage in lower levels of violent crimes (such as, simple assaults/mutual fights), the fact that they often kill when they do engage in a violent crime, makes them a greater threat by nature

These reasonable deductions should drive decision making. Unfortunately, NAXALT bias determines the flawed logic of so many Americans. This is where logic has been subverted by social-political concerns

Avoiding black males is just as logical as avoiding the black males of the dog world – pit bulls. Are some nice? Sure. Are some mild tempered? Of course. But are both statistically the largest killers within their respective breeds? No doubt[…]
Wanting to find the one smart black guy or the one cuddly pit bull does not immediately discard the broader fact that both are genetically designed threats. They should be treated accordingly, not encouraged to interact with our families or friends. Doing so invites the potential for a deadly outcome and shameful regret

As the old adage goes – never relax in such circumstances