how many bites were there

[elegy]

gee, we really don't know!

http://www.readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=75318

The Humane Society of Berks County Inc. reported 73 dog bites in the city last year, of which 29 were by pit bulls, or 39.7 percent.

. . . .

But the state, using incidents reported by doctors and hospitals, claims there were 111 dog bites in the city last year, of which 14 were by pit pulls, or 12.6 percent.

A Reading Eagle review of the bite lists showed few duplicates. After removing those, it appears the city had 171 dog bites last year, of which 43, or about 25 percent, were by pit bulls.

[corgipower]

That percentage is important because the city’s so-called aggressive-breed ordinance allows the board to impose major and expensive restrictions on any breed responsible for at least 40 percent of the annual total bites.

*sigh*

[Lilavati]

Which is idiotic, because you also need to know what percentage of dogs in the city are pit bulls to have a meaningful statistic . . . just knowing what percentage of bites were made by pit bulls is totally meaningless . . . for example, if only 1% of dogs in the city are pit bulls, then 40% would be a lot! If 50% are pit bulls, then 40% makes them less dangerous than average. Come on, people, learn some math . . .


And that's leaving aside the issues of what exactly is a 'pit bull' and what percentage of the pit bulls that bit were owned by irresponsible people who bought pit bulls because it made them feel macho . . .

Idiots.

[Renee750il]

Idiots.

Pretty much sums it up.

[Sweet72947]

Gee can those stats be any more ambiguous?