Dog Amnesty / DDA - Thoughts?

[seriousrikk]

This week has seen a lot of press coverage about supposed dangerous dogs starting with the sad death of a child from a dog attack. I actively moderate a dog rescue forum and there is a lot of worry about some of the new proposals that are being put to govornment as to a solution to 'Dangerous Dogs'

One such solution is already taking place in norther ireland and that is a dog amnesty. It is as horrific as it sounds - basically anyone who has a dog that could be a pit bull is turning them in to be killed. This is also being considered for other areas of the UK...

Now this is fine, but no-one really knows what a pit bull terrier looks like. Indeed the Dangerous Dogs Act (1991) only descripes them as a 'Pit Bull Type' which is very ambigous - especially as DEFRA describe a Labrador as 90% pit bull according to the 1991 legislation! The Stafforshire Bull Terrier is one of the nicest dogs to have in a family environment, Rotties also have an unwarrrented bad name - both are being called for by authorities to be added to the DDA Breed Specific Legislation

What I am looking for is thoughts on the subject from outside the dog rescue forums. I know I am disgusted at the attitudes of the government and councils over this as it is the fault of the owners and how they train/socialise thier dogs - and yet the dogs are getting the blame and are already being destroyed just for existing.

I say more needs to be done to owners than dogs.

Here is a link for 'Spot the pit bull'
http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Any thoughts welcome. We are starting to get a campaign together agains breed specific legislation so I would welcome input and what sort of perseptions are out there from the non doggy people
The media are having a real field day with this, which considering their recent coverage of events near Ipswitch (I think) is not a good thing.

 

[whitewash]

im not a dog lover but i still think there is no point Culling all dogs, perhaps targetting those that are the problem would be a better course of action.

and i wouldnt have a clue what a pitball looked like, i know what a bulldog looks like and its not pleasent, that, a husky, labraddor and retriever are the only dogs i could point to and name rather than waving my hand at it and go "DOG"


however anything that means that david beckhams hiddeous dog of a wife gets put down im all in favour of! :bonk:

 

[whitewash]

i had a go at the find the pitbull and after clicking on all the menacing looking dogs to no joy the pitbull looks quite tame!

 

[Darryn]

Ive got a Large Dog called Hooch, he is a Boxer and he is the softest dog ive ever known, ive had dogs all my life and this one is the quietest softest you could ever imagine... In the 3years ive had him ive heard him bark twice and once was 3am when a bloke was trying to open my patio door with a crowbar... Luckily I was so shocked to hear my dog bark that I jumped out of bed and ran down to see what was going on.

Anyway, Hooch had to go to the vets a year or so back to have a growth removed, the male vet refused to treat him without a muzzle... luckily the female vet who had dealt with Hooch previously was more than happy to perform the procedure... as she knew the temperament of the dog.

So what im basically saying is, dogs that look mean and scary arent always, so a blanket Law/Legislation is retarded... I dont read newspapers and rarely see news on TV, as its always bad news, so I dont know the ins and outs of the sad death, but, in my experience its the pet owners that need putting down, for either not monitoring and restraining there pets properly or poor training them in the first place.

Even though I know my dog is a big softy I wont let him off his lead when out in public, he is a big lad (70+lbs), full of energy and power, if he decided to get playful with someone it could hurt, let alone the idea of him getting annoyed with someone.

 

[whitewash]

ive got friends who have big dogs and ive always found them friendly.


i was attacked 2-3 times as a kid by my neighbours dog when it jumped over the fence onto the allyway, so ive never been a huge dog lover after that!

 

[CT]

I'm a dog lover. I used to obedience train dogs for people years ago, and I trained my last dog to the gun.

We need to be a lot more strict about dog ownership than we are in this country. Re-introducing the Dog Licence wont help one bit, what's needed is a responsible attitide from the owner. Having a dog is a commitment for many years and people need to show that they are prepared to behave responsibly and train the dog to minimum standards of obedience at least, particluarly with some of the larger breeds who can be terrifying animals when they're out of control.

As you say, it's not the dogs fault, it's the fault of the owners and indeed the government, for allowing it to be just so easy for people to purchase a dog on a whim which soon passes and creates another neglected potentially dangerous animal.

I'm told that in Germany, stray dogs are very rare and are quickly rounded up and destroyed. Also in Germany on Sunday mornings dog obedience classes are a common sight on any piece of spare ground, with owners taking a far more respnsible attitude to ownership.

In my local park the number of dogs - some of them large breeds who wont even return to the owners when called is quite worrying considering the number of people and often children in the vicinity.

 

[Janice]

Well as a dog-lover I spotted the PitBull first time......but my purebred soft as they come labrador has quite a chunky face and many people have asked if he was half stafforshire bull terrier or rottweiler so I can see that it can be difficult to prove unless you have papers or whatever.
Jed

 

[CT]

Janice there's no way that's anything but a good square looking lab and from working stock by the look of him - not like some of the rangey lean things you commonly see.

 

[Janice]

Janice there's no way that's anything but a good square looking lab and from working stock by the look of him - not like some of the rangey lean things you commonly see.

Yep...good old fashioned chunky headed labradors for me....cant stand these whippety-types!!

 

[Steep]

I say more needs to be done to owners than dogs.

Couldn't agree more, the problem is with the owners not the dogs, same goes for unruly kids too.

 

[richmond]

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardtheSane
I say more needs to be done to owners than dogs.

Couldn't agree more, the problem is with the owners not the dogs, same goes for unruly kids too.

Ditto

BTW I thought I knew dog breeds but it took me 3 clicks before I found the Pit Bull in the 'Find ...' link.

 

[seriousrikk]

whitewash, Sorry to hear about your bad experiences when you were younger - I can see that would put anyone off!

Dreeder, Hooch sounds lovely - there is a chap on our street with two white boxers and I have seen people cross the street to avoid him - they are soft as anything. But you are definitly being wise by keeping Hooch on lead in places he could get into mischief - believe it of not if Hooch did jump up someone and even a claw scrach could have him falling foul of the DDA. Historically it would be unlikely but with the current climate things could be differently

Janice, Jed looks stunning. Not sure how anyone could see staffie in there! I've always seen the shape of a Lab's head more Rottie to be honest.
Here are two of my parents 4 black labs LINKYTHING

CT I agree, much more needs to be done with owners and not the dogs. I've always believed no dog is born dangerous but it is their life that can do that. I'll post an article written by a friend who runs a greyhound rescue once I have permission - makes interesting reading and I expect you will be able to see what is coming having done training yourself

Thanks for your replies everyone

 

[seriousrikk]

Couldn't agree more, the problem is with the owners not the dogs, same goes for unruly kids too.

Absolutely, on both counts

Ditto

BTW I thought I knew dog breeds but it took me 3 clicks before I found the Pit Bull in the 'Find ...' link.

I got it first time this time, but I remeber when I went onto it initially ti took me a few attempts

 

[ppp]

A general cull is not required, personally I like most dogs, but it doesn't matter whether you love em or hate them.

The dog that killed the little girl was known by the family to be dangerous and the family were told by the Uncle that under no circumstances was the dog to be in the house when the little girl was there, and it was forced to stay outside.

Now IMO if a dog is that unsafe, my kid wouldn't go round that house if the dog was there fullstop regardless of it it was in garden or not, NO WAY!!!

They knew the dog was dangerous and it should have been destroyed a long time ago. More fool them for allowing the kid in the house! Sadly if a dog like that wants to get inside it will do so at any costs, as they very tragically found out.

RIP little girl

 

[whitewash]

i always find the word "destroyed" when used in the context of animal euthanasia a terrible word simply because of the imagery it conjours up

 

[Mr THX]

This week has seen a lot of press coverage about supposed dangerous dogs .

Your opening gambit says a lot about your view on this subject, obviously being so 'Pro dog' has clouded your judgement that even though this dog has mauled and killed an 5yr old child by some stretch of your imagination it's the press who are wrongly labeling the dog dangerous??

Can I ask what the dog would need to do in your eyes to correctley be labeled as dangerous??

 

[ppp]

He is talking in the general terms, obviously the dog that kiled the girl was dangerous and no one is arguing that.

What richard means is as a result the press are looking at all breeds of dog that are perceived as dangerous, whether they actually are or not.

You have taken his comment totally out of context!

 

[seriousrikk]

Your opening gambit says a lot about your view on this subject, obviously being so 'Pro dog' has clouded your judgement that even though this dog has mauled and killed an 5yr old child by some stretch of your imagination it's the press who are wrongly labeling the dog dangerous??

Can I ask what the dog would need to do in your eyes to correctley be labeled as dangerous??

In which case you have either completely mis-interpreted me or you do not want to hear my points. Unlike you I am going to make no presumptions about which it is as I do not know you.

That dog, by no fault of it's own, was dangerous and I at no point have denied that. My point is that while that dog may have been dangerous is that breed dangerous?

It is the press and the councils that are labelling entire breeds based on the actions of one dog. Notice I say breeds - it is an important point that the press are now using phrases like 'Stafforshire pit bull terrier' which is both inaccurate and desigend to scaremonger.

If you want to have a pop at me that's fine, but before you do read everything I say with an open mind and get your sodding facts straight. I realy don't appriciate your attitude that my judgement is clouded - in fact I find it downright offensive.

 

[Witch]

The worst thing is, that something like 75% of attacks by dogs, particularly, but not only, on kids, come after they have been teased and tormented practically out of their mind. If you're in any doubt, go and find a friend with a three year old and encourage that child to pull your ears and hair, stick their fingers in your eyes and mouth, hit you, slap you, and scream directly into your ears. See how long it is before you are literally having to sit on your hands to avoid grabbing the kid to make it stop. if you say "Oh no I'd be fine with that", then you're kidding yourself. Now think of it from the point of view of a dog who CAN'T grab hold of the child or tell it firmly to behave itself. not too tough to understand why some previously good character dogs turn on someone.

Sure there are sometimes "Dangerous" dogs. The one that hit the headlines this week was undoubtedly such an animal. there are dangerous humans too - Fred West? Peter Sutcliffe? should there be a "Human amnesty" perhaps, you know, just in case someone turns out to be a murderer? How long before someone comes back and says "Oh, but that's ridiculous" I wonder.......not long I trust, because yes, it IS ridiculous, as is the same idea for dogs.

Rather than unpleasant ideas like this, why can we not see the breeding industry being more strictly controlled, and then policed to ensure it stays that way? Time for the Kennel club to get involved I think.

Janice - Jed's gorgeous! I love black and choccy labs - we used to have a yellow with a broadly similar head shape - a HUGE labrador too - stood 26" to the shoulder and lost control of his feet on a regular basis due to them being so far from his brain!

I trained our last dog - a Cavalier King Charles Spaniel - from a puppy. She was a bright little spark and so long as she was kept interested a very quick learner. Used to act the clown in training classes and behave immaculately outside!

 

[seriousrikk]

ppp, you are absoultely right. If someone has a dog that is know to be dangerous then something should be done about it immedietly. Be it euthinasia or moving to a more suitable environment - I would obviously prefer the latter but if it has gone to far then the former is often the only way left open.

And yes, if a dog wants to get inside it only takes someone to open the door a crack and it will be in. So upsettiung that this could have been avoided if the owner had any sense - and a little girl would still be alive.

 

[seriousrikk]

Witch, well said. I think you will also read the followoing with interest. It is written by a freind who runs a Greyhound Rescue - now greyhouds are the most placid dogs I have met, and this is a story based on true facts...

How a child can train a dog to bite:

When a Grey is placed with a family and you start getting repeated reports of problems, please put the Grey first. This is not marriage counselling. Not all problems can be solved. The Grey is not on equal footing with the rest of the family and it is very likely bad things are happening to him. Several of the bad things will affect him for the rest of his life. These hurtful experiences are actually training experiences. The things he will be "trained" to do will make re-homing him a real problem. Biting or nipping is one of them.

A four-year old male I knew very well was placed with a family with children ranging in age from five to 16. I had handled this dog extensively for medical treatment, without muzzle or drugs. He never made a move to bite although he cried out from the painful procedures we had to use. In less than two weeks after being placed, a "nip" report came in. Then another, then another, all involving most of the children. What happened? Since it was all "unprovoked," no one knew. No one, but me, for a long time.

This was a very sensitive dog. Not timid, by any means, simply soft temperamented, deer-like, extremely easy to get any point across, and physically trusting beyond reason. Perhaps these are precisely the kind that should not be homed with rough or noisy units.

What had happened needed no verification. I know. He was "pushed." How does not matter; we all have our own buttons. He growled in protest and was ignored. He was pushed more and not allowed to seek respite. The next logical step was a snap. Voila! It worked. He was a smart dog. Why growl if it does not work? A snap will get you where you want to go. But, soon the children figured it out. "Oh, he won't bite, he just snaps." So, he was forced once again to modify his behaviour to save his sanity. He nipped. It worked.

All this took training, folks! And these people should never have been allowed to train this dog to do this!

Two months into the adoption, I received an e-mail asking my opinion. I said, "Get Him Outta There!! This dog is undergoing a very stressful experience. He is being forced to defend himself. Please, I beg you, don't make him stay."

My advice is often ignored when it is not what you want to hear. He was left in the home. Now he has suffered, now he has been forced to bear four months of abuse. Not benign neglect, but active cruelty.

Last week one of the kids had to go to the hospital for a bite, not a "nip." The family wants him gone. They are right and he should have been gone, months ago.

Now the organization is taking back a dog that "knows what he's got and knows how to use it." How sad. This sweet and lovely doe-eyed dog has been trained to be, and is now legally labelled, a biter. In a "No Second Chance" law state, he would be dead. Whose fault would it have been? Put the Grey first. There is no reason other than your own ego not to make a wrong thing right. Give him a loving chance!

 

[Janice]

ALthough I agree that the owners are to blame for badly behaved dogs..... i have to say that the instincts of a particular breed also come into play.

Beagles and hounds are hard to train as once they get a scent they are off.. including the sight hounds like greyhounds etc who see their prey.

jack russels adn other terriers will shake things (like ratting)

labradors will actively seek out water even lying in a 2" puddle

collies and shepherds like to herd their families when out for a walk.

The owners are to blame for keeping a type of dog with a particular instinct of ripping other dogs and people to shreds but they arent to blame for its behaviour....it is instinct...the owners didnt make them like it...... they definitely shouldnt be allowed to be kept as pets. However well meaning and well trained the owners are.........that type of dog is a killing machine.

 

[Witch]

Thanks for posting that Richard - it's really brought tears to my eyes. The daft thing is that a cat can inflict a nasty injury on a kid, but it's deemed to be "just a scratch". I've had scratches from our cat which have been borderline needing stitches (notably when she was terrified by a dog and I had to stand on a chair to try to peel her off the curtain rail and get her claws out of the ceiling - NO I do NOT have pics of this!) the kid rapidly learns not to pester the cat too much because scratches hurt. As the above article says though, the dog starts with a growl, then a snap, etc etc. Cat's simply don't have that level of patience so they react faster, getting the message across to their abuser (or rescuer in my case - next time the damned moggy STAYS on the sodding curtains!) quicker.

I bet there are a few parents on here who can say they have, at some stage, administered a slap round the back of the legs / bum to one of their kids when they've been pushed beyond reason? Are YOU dangerous to kids then?!

 

[Witch]

The owners are to blame for keeping a type of dog with a particular instinct of ripping other dogs and people to shreds but they arent to blame for its behaviour....it is instinct...the owners didnt make them like it...... they definitely shouldnt be allowed to be kept as pets. However well meaning and well trained the owners are.........that type of dog is a killing machine.

Blamde the breeders janice - it is the fact that some breeds have been bred for their "nastiness" which makes them so. The fact is, that nobody wanting a dog for the right reasons would want a dog which has been bred so badly. Think of the names they get given? "Tyson" "Killer" etc - says it all, really.

 

[seriousrikk]

Janice, I'm not sure I agree with you there - there are so many bull breeds out there and the dog being referred to was only aver described as a 'Pitt Bull Type'
Unfortunatly the DDA wording means pretty much every dog that is a bull breed and many that are not can be referred as a pitt bull type. The instincts of a bull breed is not a killing machine - otherwise the KC would not be recommending the Staffordshire Bull Terrier as the absolute best do to get in a household with children.
I agree in all cases a paticular breed instinct comes to play, however the suggestions that any dog has an instinct to attack and kill is not something I can agree with at all.

 

[seriousrikk]

Witch, your are right about the cats - I've still got a scar 10 years on from trying to rescue a cat from a tree! Dogs have a far great parience threshold but once they have been taught that biting works then they will use it until they are taught otherwise - which is a much longer process - as was found with the greyhound mentioned above.

Below is a link to a statement made today by The Kennel Club

TBH I think they are making a lot more sense than certain police forces & councils.

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/839/23/5/3

 

[CT]

While some breeds have been bred to be specifically nasty and aggressive, considerable harm has been done to many breeds by people breeding animals with no insight into the pedigree, temperament, and likely consequences of their actions. I lost count of the offers I had to put ny Springer dog to someone's bitch for no more than commercial gain, but I always declined.

Going back a few years the two breeds which bit more people both here and in the USA were... wait for it... Labs and Cocker Spaniels! Totally alien to the nature of both breeds. Cockers have been particualarly badly effected as a breed, to the extent that a guy down south somewhere has started a working strain with the right typical temperament from the sound dogs he was able to find, and you'll pay a handsome price if you want one.

Whichever way you cut it, it comes back to people not dogs who are to blame.

 

[CT]

Richard, I'm sure you know this, but a dog is a pack animal, and as such it will be submissive or dominant depending on where it sees itself in the pecking order, and the typical human family is it's pack. It can't be a happy animal by nature, however much we think we've domesticated them, unless it's sure of it's place in the pack. If that animal sees itself anywhere other than lowest position in the pack, or if it thinks a higher position could be gained by a challenge, then it's problem time, and often (although not always) it's the smallest and weakest in the pack it wont be subservient to, or who it will eventually challenge. Whether it leads to an attack or kill situation, often just depends on size and breed,

 

[seriousrikk]

I agree with you there CT - when I think about houw our dog behaves he is often seeking re-assurance from me about his actions etc. If my fiancee tells him to do something he will usually do it but if feeling paticularly stubborn sometimes checks with me and just the right sort of look will have him behaving (As much as is possible for a lurcher anyway!)

I can also see how attacks on children come about this way. A dog that has not been socialised well with dogs from a young age will not have those mental triggers that suggest 'hang on, i've done this before and bad things happened to me' when it hs been slapped down by a bigger/older/wiser dog. Move over now to a situation with children who are doing things the dog dislikes rather than leave it will then do the 'slapping down' in the only way t knows how.
I still say that every dog need to be told it can use a bite to hurt. But take a dog that doesn not see itself as bottom of the pecking order, and teachi t that a bite hurts other and you have serious problems.

Your last line strikes home too. We see bull breeds, German Shepherds, Rotties, Akitas and Dobies in the news most because when they end up ina situation where they will bite, they have very powerful jaws so their bite will be that much more damaging. IMO no dog shold ever be placed in a position where it can be trained to, allowed to, or needs to bite.

 

[Mr THX]

In which case you have either completely mis-interpreted me or you do not want to hear my points. Unlike you I am going to make no presumptions about which it is as I do not know you.

That dog, by no fault of it's own, was dangerous and I at no point have denied that. My point is that while that dog may have been dangerous is that breed dangerous?

It is the press and the councils that are labelling entire breeds based on the actions of one dog. Notice I say breeds - it is an important point that the press are now using phrases like 'Stafforshire pit bull terrier' which is both inaccurate and desigend to scaremonger.

If you want to have a pop at me that's fine, but before you do read everything I say with an open mind and get your sodding facts straight. I realy don't appriciate your attitude that my judgement is clouded - in fact I find it downright offensive.

Whether you find it offensive or not the fact that I consider your judgement to be clouded is my own opinion. If you don't want the thoughts and opinions of other members from a public forum then don't post asking for them.

Your love of dogs is one which I imagine has lead you to post on here asking for peoples thoughts "Outside the rescue forums" I think that as so many other dog lovers have answered your request has given this thread an unbalanced feel to it.

I agree with you that wholesale breed culling is not the way to go, but your reference to particular breeds not being dangerous is taking away the crediblity of your argument.

Rotties also have an unwarrrented bad name

People consider 'Rotties' and the 'Pit Bull type' dogs to be dangerous because there have been too many incidents of these breeds attacking/mauling and in some cases killing people......

If all the problems are in the hands of the owners and not inherent in a particular breed then why do we not see more news reports that a spanial/collie/lab.... (delete as applicable) has attacked and mauled or killed a child?

 

[CT]

I agree with you there CT - when I think about houw our dog behaves he is often seeking re-assurance from me about his actions etc. If my fiancee tells him to do something he will usually do it but if feeling paticularly stubborn sometimes checks with me and just the right sort of look will have him behaving (As much as is possible for a lurcher anyway!)

LOL. That's just it exactly. I had a huge German Shepherd once who was a rescue dog. He worshipped the ground I walked on, waited outside the bog door for me, and wasn't happy unless he was lying across my feet or leaning on me.

He was great with the wife most of the time and with the kids, but if I was away from home any length of time with work, which I often was, he could develop a very stubborn streak with the wife and he really resented any affection I showed the youngest child. In the end I had to find him another home. Broke my heart at the time, but I just couldn't take the risk.

 

[seriousrikk]

Going back a few years the two breeds which bit more people both here and in the USA were... wait for it... Labs and Cocker Spaniels! Totally alien to the nature of both breeds. Cockers have been particualarly badly effected as a breed, to the extent that a guy down south somewhere has started a working strain with the right typical temperament from the sound dogs he was able to find, and you'll pay a handsome price if you want one.

Whichever way you cut it, it comes back to people not dogs who are to blame.

I agree with you that wholesale breed culling is not the way to go, but your reference to particular breeds not being dangerous is taking away the crediblity of your argument.

People consider 'Rotties' and the 'Pit Bull type' dogs to be dangerous because there have been too many incidents of these breeds attacking/mauling and in some cases killing people......

If all the problems are in the hands of the owners and not inherent in a particular breed then why do we not see more news reports that a spanial/collie/lab.... (delete as applicable) has attacked and mauled or killed a child?

We see bull breeds, German Shepherds, Rotties, Akitas and Dobies in the news most because when they end up ina situation where they will bite, they have very powerful jaws so their bite will be that much more damaging. IMO no dog shold ever be placed in a position where it can be trained to, allowed to, or needs to bite.

Few points for you to think about. If you want to.

Whether you find it offensive or not the fact that I consider your judgement to be clouded is my own opinion. If you don't want the thoughts and opinions of other members from a public forum then don't post asking for them.

ahem

obviously being so 'Pro dog' has clouded your judgement that even though this dog has mauled and killed an 5yr old child by some stretch of your imagination it's the press who are wrongly labeling the dog dangerous??

Can I ask what the dog would need to do in your eyes to correctley be labeled as dangerous??

The above (in bold) has never been an opinion in it's life. It is quite clearly an attack on me. Please don't try and dress it up as an opinion. Using phrases like 'Obviously' and 'Some stretch of your imagination' are not concurrent with stating an opinon.

If you can't at least admit your first statement in this thread was ill thought out can you at least drop this and allow the thread to run it's course?

 

[seriousrikk]

LOL. That's just it exactly. I had a huge German Shepherd once who was a rescue dog. He worshipped the ground I walked on, waited outside the bog door for me, and wasn't happy unless he was lying across my feet or leaning on me.

He was great with the wife most of the time and with the kids, but if I was away from home any length of time with work, which I often was, he could develop a very stubborn streak with the wife and he really resented any affection I showed the youngest child. In the end I had to find him another home. Broke my heart at the time, but I just couldn't take the risk.

Very wise choice, and having had to rehome a dog myself I understand.

I see someone walking three very large shepherds every morning. They are all off the lead but they are entirely focussed on him, constantly looking at him and seeking re-assurance - they clearly see him as pack leader. A lot can be learned and understood by simply observing dogs behavour - and not enough owners take time to do this either.

 

[CT]

Oh well I'm hitting the sack - play nice fellers.

 

[h.r.ford]

While some breeds have been bred to be specifically nasty and aggressive, considerable harm has been done to many breeds by people breeding animals with no insight into the pedigree, temperament, and likely consequences of their actions. I lost count of the offers I had to put ny Springer dog to someone's bitch for no more than commercial gain, but I always declined.

Going back a few years the two breeds which bit more people both here and in the USA were... wait for it... Labs and Cocker Spaniels! Totally alien to the nature of both breeds. Cockers have been particualarly badly effected as a breed, to the extent that a guy down south somewhere has started a working strain with the right typical temperament from the sound dogs he was able to find, and you'll pay a handsome price if you want one.

Whichever way you cut it, it comes back to people not dogs who are to blame.

This is absolutely correct. I have an American Cocker Spaniel and they have an awful reputation as a family dog! It started with the movie Lady and the Tramp where the Cocker Spaniel stayed the number one newly registered AKC (American Kennel Club) dog for over 10 years. Puppy farms were breeding for nothing other than profit and the results were catastrophic. I kept my dog whole till he reached his championship and then I had him neutered. I actually had to fight with my vet to neuter as he has such a fantastic temperament she asked that I please find a bitch with the same temperament and had him sire one litter. I declined but the point is that the cocker spaniel one of the most loving of breeds has had aggression and plain nastiness bred right into it.

I have found that pit bull types and rotties to be some of the most loving dogs in the world but some are born "wrong" as with any breed and those should either be kept in a safe manor or euthenised. You cannot say all dogs of a specific breed are bad. As someone else said not all humans are so great either! And then what about all those little dogs like chihuahuas I've met some nasty nasty little dogs but because there is no chance they will actually kill someone it is ok to have a nasty one about. I really don't get that.

These things are knee jerk reactions by politicians who want to be seen like they are doing something when it isn't the governments place really to fix problems like these it is up to individuals to turn in even their friends who have dangerous dogs regardless of breed and it is up to the Kennel Club to do something about breeding standards. In many countries (The US isn't one of them either) the dog/bitch has to pass a breed standard test including temperament before it can be registered not just have two parents who were registered. I don't know if this is would truly help but it can't hurt.

 

[tiler65]

If I had a tiger and fed it well never teased it and made it feel welcome and it never bit me, would it be possible to keep it as a pet?

the simple answer is NOBODY can predict the behaviour of man let alone animals.

Dogs are dangerous as is a tiger.

(dog ownwer)

 

[Janice]

recommending the Staffordshire Bull Terrier as the absolute best do to get in a household with children.

Thats true with children.....but a staffy killed 2 of my cats and ripped my labradors throat and ear to peices.

 

[Mr THX]

I think this study although American based was put together using a large amount of data and over a realistic period..........it just emphasises the notion of why 'the layman' considers these breeds of dog to be dangerous.

The element of RISK involved with people who own these dogs is far greater than thoses from other breeds.

Statistics relating to Pit Bull attacks
The Clifton study revealed that pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks on children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal being studied.

If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.

The Clifton Study Report

 

[Steep]

I own a Jack Russel, and I've heard people say that they can be snappy bad tempered dogs, mine is just the opposite, loves to play and anyone who throws a ball for her is a friend for life. However, I've seen her take and kill a rabbit so I know she has it in her to be violent and I am careful not to let her get into situations where this could be a problem (never leave her alone with children for example)

I think that a well fed, well looked after, happy dog is far less likely to be a problem regardless of breed. Yes dogs are pack animals and have an instinct to protect/dominate but a responsible owner knows this and takes the proper precautions and ultimately it MUST be the owner who is held responsible.

 

[seriousrikk]

If I had a tiger and fed it well never teased it and made it feel welcome and it never bit me, would it be possible to keep it as a pet?

the simple answer is NOBODY can predict the behaviour of man let alone animals.

Dogs are dangerous as is a tiger.

(dog ownwer)

I don't believe that analogy is quite right, a Tiger is a large and very powerful Cat. Domesticated animals, while still animals, have a significantly reduced set of instincts compared to wild animals.

The question still remains as to whether a dog of any breed, or a specific breed, is born dangerous - or does the upbring make a dog dangerous?