Certain dog breeds...I just don't get it.

[rhino]

Why does that matter? Shouldn't it matter more when a "wimpy dog" bites people more often than a pit bull or a Rotty?

Are you joking? Why does that matter? You're joking, right?

How many people have been seriously injured or killed by a toy dachshund? Being annoyed to death doesn't count.

 

[Dead Duck]

DOGS LIVES MATTER!

 

[lovemachine]

Just because my 130lb Rotty is bigger and strong than a poodle doesn't make him dangerous. I at least know he's trained, socialized and friendly toward everyone he meets. The poodle can be a mean SOB, and actually attack someone, but I know for a fact my Rotty won't. In my book, that makes the poodle more dangerous.

 

[rhino]

Just because my 130lb Rotty is bigger and strong than a poodle doesn't make him dangerous. I at least know he's trained, socialized and friendly toward everyone he meets. The poodle can be a mean SOB, and actually attack someone, but I know for a fact my Rotty won't. In my book, that makes the poodle more dangerous.

Let's look at what I actually wrote instead of what you interpreted:

Would you not agree that the potential consequences are more serious when a pit bull, rottweiler, German shepherd, etc. bite when compared to a cocker spaniel or other wimpy dog?

My question was specifically about when an attack occurs. I was not discussing likelihood, the role of training, or anything else. Just getting at the inescapable fact that some types of dogs are far more capable of causing serious harm or killing people, whereas some are far less so. The potential consequences are as much a part of risk assessment as the probability of the events happening or not happening.

You can make strong arguments that dogs like rottweilers and pit bulls are no more likely to attach than the aforementioned toy dachshund. The other part is not even arguable though. The potential consequences of the former attacking are dramatically more serious and this is at the core of people's opinions about them. Some of it becomes emotional, but you can't argue that when a pit bull bites for real, more damage is going to be done than when a cocker spaniel gums you with all of its might.

 

[JettaKnight]

My question was specifically about when an attack occurs. I was not discussing likelihood, the role of training, or anything else. Just getting at the inescapable fact that some types of dogs are far more capable of causing serious harm or killing people, whereas some are far less so. The potential consequences are as much a part of risk assessment as the probability of the events happening or not happening.

You can make strong arguments that dogs like rottweilers and pit bulls are no more likely to attach than the aforementioned toy dachshund. The other part is not even arguable though. The potential consequences of the former attacking are dramatically more serious and this is at the core of people's opinions about them. Some of it becomes emotional, but you can't argue that when a pit bull bites for real, more damage is going to be done than when a cocker spaniel gums you with all of its might.

IBTTCWG

 

[dhamby]

Some pits do have genetic issues that result in aggression from the animal from breeding but these are typically found in blue nose pits because they are the most sought-after. We have a pit that we rescued as a pup and has been the best dog I have ever had. He will growl and bark at strangers at first but has never went after anyone. In fact if they walk towards him he runs away. I have had several other breads that growl and bark but will actually lunge at strangers that were not bully breeds.

Yes pits will cause more damage that a small toy sized dog or weaker dog. Honestly I would be more afraid of a chow that any of the bully breed dogs.

 

[KG1]

I hate getting bitten by a wimpy dog.

 

[BugI02]

Let's look at what I actually wrote instead of what you interpreted:



My question was specifically about when an attack occurs. I was not discussing likelihood, the role of training, or anything else. Just getting at the inescapable fact that some types of dogs are far more capable of causing serious harm or killing people, whereas some are far less so. The potential consequences are as much a part of risk assessment as the probability of the events happening or not happening.

You can make strong arguments that dogs like rottweilers and pit bulls are no more likely to attach than the aforementioned toy dachshund. The other part is not even arguable though. The potential consequences of the former attacking are dramatically more serious and this is at the core of people's opinions about them. Some of it becomes emotional, but you can't argue that when a pit bull bites for real, more damage is going to be done than when a cocker spaniel gums you with all of its might.

So we should limit everybody to .32 and .380, because those bigger calibers are '...far more capable of causing serious harm or killing people, whereas some are far less so." Oh, that's right, training makes a difference in these circumstances.

 

[BugI02]

DOGS LIVES MATTER!

Yes, they do.

 

[phylodog]

Would you not agree that the potential consequences are more serious when a pit bull, rottweiler, German shepherd, etc. bite when compared to a cocker spaniel or other wimpy dog?

Sure they are. Makes little difference to me and people are free to avoid the responsibility that comes with bringing a powerful animal into their home.

I've seen what an AR15 does at close range and it's significantly more devastating than a 22lr. Fortunately responsible gun owners aren't being punished (here anyway) by a prohibition on them based on their capability.

 

[OutdoorDad]

If you want to know how bad ass your dog is, make a quick phone call to your homeowner insurance agent.

Tell him/her "I've got a (insert the age, sex, neuter/spay status, weight, breed, number of previous bite incidents, of your dog here)

If you hesitate for a moment to say "Doberman" or "Pit Bull" or "Rottweiler" or "Chihuahua" then I pity you.
If you say "mixed breed" to your insurance agent, but claim a "purebred Cordoba Fighting Dog" to your friends, I pity you more. (google that breed if you have a minute or two)
If your insurance agent comes back and "rates" you differently, understand that they don't have a dog in this fight. Its all just math. They will give you a dollar amount based on the likelihood of a claim against you based on the type/age/history/breed of your dog. It's very scientific. And since its all free market based, there isn't any "cheating" or undue influence based on fear or an inherent bias.


And although I am currently dog-less, I never told a friend or stranger that my dog didn't bite. I only offered that they had not "bitten anyone yet."

 

[mondomojo]

Fortunately responsible gun owners aren't being punished (here anyway) by a prohibition on them based on their capability.

It seems to be part of the politically correct nature to want to legislate from the position of something's "worse possible potential" without regard to the 99.9% of other potential it might have. Sad.

 

[Dead Duck]

This breed must be extremely vicious for this to happen.

Dog's Body Found With 'WE BEAT IT 2 Death lol!' Note: Pembroke Pines Police | NBC 6 South Florida

'WE BEAT IT 2 Death' Sick Note Found on Dog's Body - NBC News

I'm not a fan of "Microwave Dogs" and would probably never have one (on purpose) but I wouldn't hesitate to "End" whoever did this to him.

 

[Dead Duck]

Oh and here's the proof about dangerous pitbulls.

These 30 Images Prove that Pit Bulls Are Extremely Vicious Creatures, Especially #9. | Just something (creative)

 

[OutdoorDad]

It seems to be part of the politically correct nature to want to legislate from the position of something's "worse possible potential" without regard to the 99.9% of other potential it might have. Sad.

Huh?
no one is talking about legislation... at least not that I'm aware of.

And this is the most politically incorrect thread I've been a part of in years...

If we are talking about 99.9% meaning 1,000 licks for every bite? That's not "worst possible potential". That's a failure rate that I find unacceptable in any dog I've ever owned. I expect infinite licks and no bites. But that's just me.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Let me draw a quick parallel here. Full disclosure: I do have a pit and he is lovable and protective. With one of us around, he might lick someone to death. I also fully trust him with my 5 1/2 month old grandson, and that is speaking volumes.

Now, as to the parallel: Breeds of dogs are like "breeds" of people. If you say that there is a single breed of dog you hate on sight, in effect, what you're doing is saying "All White people are haters." or "All Black people are thieves." or "All Jews are penny pinchers."

What you are doing is called prejudice: Judging all based on characteristics of some.

I've written this out before, but way back in the mid 1980s in South Texas, two young ladies went missing within days of each other. One was Heidi Seeman and the other, Erica Botello. Heidi was 11, Erica was... 7, I think. This is all from memory.

Some weeks later, each girl's decomposed body was found. No one has ever been convicted of either murder, to my knowledge. In the weeks and months following, it seemed like every night, there was another report of a missing child. People were beside themselves, wondering what was leading to the rash of child abductions that year.

It was only in the middle of the following year, when the previous year's stats were compiled, that we realized that *fewer* children were abducted that year than in the years preceding, but with the media reporting all of them, it looked like we had an epidemic of abductions.

The point here? Simple. Yes, we hear a lot about bully breeds doing stuff. As Phylo pointed out, before Pits, it was German Shepherds, and before them, Rotties, which followed Doberman Pinschers... Whatever catches the media's eye.



Don't get roped in and succumb to prejudice. It only demeans you, not the object of your hatred.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Dead Duck]

I Hate Spinach!









Damn - I am a hater.

 

[JettaKnight]

IBTTCWG

So we should limit everybody to .32 and .380, because those bigger calibers are '...far more capable of causing serious harm or killing people, whereas some are far less so." Oh, that's right, training makes a difference in these circumstances.

Called it.

 

[17 squirrel]

I'm not roped in at all, nor do I succumb to prejudice.
The statistics are all over the web..

Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to December 31, 2014
By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2014, Merritt Clifton, editor of Animals 24-7, shows the dog breeds most responsible for disfiguring injuries and deaths.
The combination of molosser breeds, including pit bulls, rottweilers, presa canarios, cane corsos, mastiffs, dogo argentinos, fila brasieros, sharpeis, boxers, and their mixes, inflict:
86% of attacks that induce bodily harm
81% of attacks to children
89% of attack to adults
76% of attacks that result in fatalities
86% that result in maiming
Embody 9.2%+ of the total dog population

 

[OutdoorDad]

Let me draw a quick parallel here. Full disclosure: I do have a pit and he is lovable and protective. With one of us around, he might lick someone to death. I also fully trust him with my 5 1/2 month old grandson, and that is speaking volumes.

Now, as to the parallel: Breeds of dogs are like "breeds" of people. If you say that there is a single breed of dog you hate on sight, in effect, what you're doing is saying "All White people are haters." or "All Black people are thieves." or "All Jews are penny pinchers."

Don't get roped in and succumb to prejudice. It only demeans you, not the object of your hatred.

Blessings,
Bill

Bill,

1) I had a lovable Doberman for 15 years (during a time when they were getting a lot of bad press). I expected her to behave with all other animals and children. But I didn't trust her to do so. She was a dog. Who knows what a dog will do... My 2 year old niece used to feed her Dortitos and pull her tail and ears. And as she got older, my niece would run her through her commands to sit, stay, move out of the way and to run to the end of a leash and growl, snap and snarl at anyone who wasn't holding the leash. And a few other commands that were very funny and demonstrated my dog's intelligence.

2) Don't trust your dog with your grandson. Not for an instant. All guns are loaded, even if they aren't. All dogs can hurt/kill a child, even if they haven't.

3) "Breeds" of people? Please rethink this one. I'm not a fan of eugenics. Personally, I'm confident that "race" is a fantasy. And as a dad of an adopted daughter from the other side of the planet who has the good sense to look nothing like me (thank God!) I reject your parallel of "breeds" of dogs and "breeds" of people.
In the brief time I've been here, this train of though seems very unlike you.

4) I'll try very diligently not to succumb to prejudice. And I'll also try not to attribute human characteristics to animals- despite my significant love and affection for a particular pet.