Guess what I have....

My male Pap is fearful. He hates people and after 3 years with us still displays fearful behaviours such as slinking and crouching.

He is also a very happy and loving little dog with so much to give. A CH in the show ring, affectionate on his terms and a clown with other dogs. Should he be dead? By your reasoning, yes.

Another point is. If he were dead it wouldn't free up a home for a shelter dog. I don't want another shelter dog. I want show quality Papillons.

What about dogs like Mia that go through some pretty bad fear/reactive phases as a youngster but then with time and maturity grow out of them and become very stable dogs?

Lol!

Once again, it's wonderful the flaming you get when your opinion differs. Notice I'm not attacking or being condescending towards those of you that think fearful dogs should be kept alive. Why? Because that is your opinion and it is your right to have it. But it's totally okay for you to be abrasive and condescending towards Teal or I, because your opinion is majority. Flip back through this thread and notice that Teal expressed her opinion on the matter and if it hadn't been for people that decided to reply to her post instead of the OP in disagreement, inclining her to share more of her opinion, then this argument wouldn't be here in the first place. Lastly, it's the Internet. If people don't want to hear what others have to say and want some sort of "opinion limit" on things they post...they probably really shouldn't be posting on the Internet at all.

And when you say all shy bulldogs( or any dog for that matter) need to be shot, prepare to deal with the response from dog owners because no doubt about it it will offend!!!

My dog is shy, but that is not what he is all about. In new places, he would need a lot of time to adjust. To some people, he would try to avoid you. Other than that, his shyness does not effect his life. He still enjoys going out, having playdates, visiting new places, and meeting new people, even if it takes time for him to adjust to that person. When he does adjust to you, you will have a friend for life who not only be as loyal to you as he is to his owner, but never forget you as well. He is still one of the most smartest and most human dog I've ever had. He is extremely intune to human emotions. You don't have to cry, he feels it when your hurting and would press his body against you when you are. I have no doubt he would risk his life for me. To have some so called dog lover say that they would put a bullet in him just for his shyness and nothing else, ignoring everything else about him, than yes, you just struck a cord. A shy dog isn't just a shy dog, they are MORE than that. Dogs aren't diposable objects that you throw away just because there is something wrong with it. They are so much more than that!

Like I said, I think that if a dog is fearful to the point of effecting it's life, it should be put down.

Flaming? Nobody is hostile, nobody is calling you names, nobody is attacking you personally, nobody has used a single swear word. Flaming? Hardly. And this is amazingly civil for this board, even.
They are, however, giving specific examples of situations that fall under your broad umbrella of "fearful dogs should be put down" and challenging your conclusion. People change their minds through discussion. It has happened on this board before. If you don't want anyone to discuss your opinion, you probably should keep it private. If you share your opinion publicly, you've made it game to be discussed publicly.


There are several members on this board who believe any less than perfect pit or pit mix should be put down, and they have recently been making it a point to passive-aggressively bring it up in a number of threads. Routinely going around and implying a dog - one you have never met before, and only have a text description which may or may not be factual or accurate - should be killed is not going to endear you to many people. If there are members being met with aggression - and once again, I see a surprising display of civility unusual for this board's history - it's not over a "different opinion."

This. If you think this is flaming, you've seen nothing. This is called a discussion.

But does that only apply to dogs? Does that only apply to fear? Who should be the one to determine when a dogs life is effected? The owner? The vet? Somebody on a forum who has never met the dog?

:thumbup:

Well, I think the response you're getting to the opinion fearful dogs don't deserve a shot at a life is probably that from people who own or have worked with fearful dogs. I know that I can get passionate to opposing opinions that apply to my own dogs, whether or not they specifically mention mine or not.

How far someone wishes to go to provide a fearful dog a normal way of life is their option, yes, and yours would be to euthanize. I would hope those who would euthanize wouldn't voluntarily take on a fearful dog, but there are people who will. My Dachshund went from shut down and fearfully aggressive, to a relatively normal guy who just prefers not to be pet by others and needs to meet other dogs in a specific way to be able to happily ignore them. I was told it would be best to euthanize after he bit me, but it wasn't my opinion and here we are four years later. He's leading a happy normal life.
My foster is kind of targeted first hand in the fact that she was terrified of every thing when I first met her and she is a Pit mix. The extent of her issues had her slated to be euthanized, but I opted to take her. She has been with me for almost 7 months and we're still working, but I am confident she is an adoptable dog.

I suppose I am confused about it in the confines of this thread, since I went through the thread and didn't see any huge description on the dog having severely limiting fear issues impacting their way of life.

:hail::hail::hail:

Effecting its life how? We have tons of dogs here who, for example, can't go to dog parks. My own dog can't go because of fear related reactivity. That effects her life. I don't give a flip. She doesn't need to go to dog parks to have a good life.

If a dog doesn't get to go on vacations because they fear such situations, but instead stays with a friend while the family is away, sure, that's an effect. Countless people don't take their dogs on vacation anyway. Is that really a big enough effect to say the dog should have a bullet put in its head?

My own dog once spent 3 hours refusing to get out of the car, just shaking in the backseat because she had been frightened. Should I have just shot her then? We worked through it and she not only got over that particular fear, but went on to earn a championship in agility. And hasn't had a severe fear reaction in probably 5 years.

I'm not above saying that rescues should euthanize dogs with severe fear issues rather than rehome them. If the dog has mild fear issues that don't result in aggression (ie the dog who is scared of men initially, but won't bite if one reaches for it), absolutely work with it if the rescue has the resources.

But what I find particularly upsetting is that the comments didn't differentiated between unowned rescue animals, and owned pets. That is a huge distinction in my book. Do I think it is perhaps wasteful for a rescue to spend enormous resources rehabbing/treating unowned dogs? Probably. But once someone owns that dog, I would never judge someone who moves heaven and earth to treat that dog's emotional or physical damage. It isn't A dog anymore; it is THEIR dog.

If the comment had been "I wish rescues wouldn't spend so much time working with fearful dogs who may never be able to be rehomed when there are others dying who don't have issues", I doubt you'd be seeing so much of a response. But when someone basically says "A lot of you own dogs who I think should have a bullet in their head", well...expect some reaction. You'll see the same response if someone comes on here saying pit bulls should be banned, toy dogs are stupid, or purebreds are evil.

I would like to mention that Uncle Fred was so fearful when I got him that I really couldn't get a good look at him, because he was in a two room kennel and he kept slinking off to the other side. He shook all the way home, and then cowered against the front door for 48 hours. For a year he would not come when my husband or adult son called him.

Today Uncle Fred is not even remotely a fearful dog. He is a happy, confident dog who cheerfully approaches pretty much any situation head on. Now, I will add the he was brutally abused before I got him, which accounted for his behavior, but there is no question he was about the most fearful animal imaginable. I mean, it took about two months before he would even howl.

I had a pit before I had Uncle Fred, and we got UF immediately after we had to euthanize Deuce, after one of those heart wrenching decisions that Renee mentioned. It was one of the hardest things I've ever done.

I'm not proud of it, but I am aware of it. I'm sorry if I don't sugarcoat things.



I don't understand comments like this. Like you think I'm going to change my opinion because a dog I like in pictures turns out to not have a temperament I like? Sorry, nope.. not gonna work. I still Harleigh is a gorgeous dog, but apparently I wouldn't like her. Oh well.



This is an interesting concept, and I entirely don't understand it...



This is where you are wrong. I posted how I felt. Plain and simple. How others were going to receive it was not part of my thought process. It has become QUITE apparent that everyone likes to make everything as dramatic as possible, and how I word things draws those people like magnets to take what one little thing I've said and turn it into 12 pages' worth of annoying and pointless discussion that didn't need to happen. You'd think I'd learn by now to keep my mouth shut, because it's definitely not the first time it has happened!

It really goes all ways. Some people hate Pits, and think they should all be put down. Some people hate fearful dogs, and think they should all be put down. Some people have NO tolerance for confident, snarky dogs that have the potential to be aggressive, and think THEY should be put down.

Bottom line, your opinion doesn't really matter all that much except to you. And if it floats your boat to put those types of dogs down, thinking they are detrimental to our society or dog world, go for it. But just because it floats YOUR boat, it doesn't really mean it's right or that the boat is actually going to float. It's really more of a, "Whatever floats your boat, but it looks like you're sinking to me." Besides, just because I don't like Pits, I don't think they should all die. Why do you think all fear-reactive dogs should die just because they aren't what YOU want? Really? Because obviously you're the only dog owner out there.

And the earlier comment about how a certain type of dog is labeled a Pit? That's something people just have to get over. Black dogs are going to be called Labs, fluffy dogs with blue eyes are going to be called Collies or "huskies". They are unfortunately relative terms that we ALL have to live with. Pit people aren't that special. And no, you aren't anymore special because Pits have breed bans and "omgtheyaregoingtodie". Other breeds are discriminated against as well, including Akitas, Dobermans, Rotties, and Mastiffs. And trust me, the general public can't anymore tell the difference between a Masttif/Pitt and a Sibe/Akita. Or, hell, even the difference between the 20+ different "huskie" breeds out there.

So, that's my thoughts on it.

All because an owner didn't want to take their dog on vacation with them. People are like dogs, they aren't all the same. You can't expect the entire dog population to just accept anything that comes at it. Not ALL dogs have to LOVE people, not ALL dogs have to LOVE a change in environment. Just how the world rolls, no matter the species.

And that. Definitely that.

I mean that there are some spectacular dogs out there who need help with fear issues before they can really shine. I think it is too bad that a dog who would really thrive and be great with what you have to offer them would be skipped over because they had some fears to begin with. I'd have missed out on an awful lot if I'd let Meg's initial fears make me pass her up, when what I went looking for was a great agility dog. I not only got that in the end, but I'm 50x the trainer I would have been had I not owned her. Gusto and any dog I have in the future is lucky I had Meg first, because I have a skill set that would never have been created with a different dog.

Who they hell said they HATE fearful dogs? Certainly not I.

And you did differently?

You took a statement about a dog being too scared to go on vacation and interjected that all fearful pit types should be dead? That is running with it.