but wait! only pit bulls attack!
- Thread starter elegy
- Start date
LabBreeder said:
Really Jess...I'm sorry. I even tried to help by sending an email to those evil nasty SPCA people...you read it, you know. God, I'm really sorry. Barring all the other crap that was said to everyone else...I shouldn't have said that to you. 
L
Buddy...I know this already. I was there, remember?
I even requested one or two be closed that I started. It's not the trying to help part that was wrong...that I appreciate. It was just at a wrong time, IMO of course. I swear I was totally good til that point.
Btw, I did apologize...and you're right. It was unacceptable.
Wow! I'm going to grab a beer now.
You know people talk about aggressive dogs, protective dogs, biting dogs, whatever, but I have noticed repeatedly that humans are the main aggressors. Just look at this thread. Mud is slinging, and hurtful, unnecessary snide remarks have been spoken. I'm sure if it was possible, some of you would be duking it out. hangs head in shame to be a human.
AND WE WONDER WHY THE HELL THERE IS BSL! IT IS ALL BECAUSE OF HUMANS, NOT DOGS. Think about it people, before your next post.
Not one of you has every mentioned that often kids, or adults will antagonize a well trained dog to the point of attacking. That seems to be overlooked, or what about the criminal that jumps the fence and gets bit. Is that aggression, no that is protection. yet it is the dogs fault, not the human perpetrator.
You know people talk about aggressive dogs, protective dogs, biting dogs, whatever, but I have noticed repeatedly that humans are the main aggressors. Just look at this thread. Mud is slinging, and hurtful, unnecessary snide remarks have been spoken. I'm sure if it was possible, some of you would be duking it out. hangs head in shame to be a human.
AND WE WONDER WHY THE HELL THERE IS BSL! IT IS ALL BECAUSE OF HUMANS, NOT DOGS. Think about it people, before your next post.
Not one of you has every mentioned that often kids, or adults will antagonize a well trained dog to the point of attacking. That seems to be overlooked, or what about the criminal that jumps the fence and gets bit. Is that aggression, no that is protection. yet it is the dogs fault, not the human perpetrator.
Here's an idea about an alternitive to BSL
The HS should come into everyone's home, evaluate the living situations and the temperment of the dogs. If they are found to be poor then those people should be banished to a private island and never allowed to leave it.
There problem sloved and we cal all go back to our normal lives.
The HS should come into everyone's home, evaluate the living situations and the temperment of the dogs. If they are found to be poor then those people should be banished to a private island and never allowed to leave it.
There problem sloved and we cal all go back to our normal lives.
LMAO. A private island!?!? I love it.
filarotten I very well could've been one of those on drugs crazy lady duking it out! LMAO
You're totally right though, protecting and just plain old aggression get messed up. But, of course, that never comes out. Any dog that bites is bad. Now as usual I have nothing to back this statement up (LMAO) but I did hear this. That a burgular broke into someone's house and the dog bit them the burgular, yes the criminal could sue.
Why is that?
filarotten I very well could've been one of those on drugs crazy lady duking it out! LMAO
You're totally right though, protecting and just plain old aggression get messed up. But, of course, that never comes out. Any dog that bites is bad. Now as usual I have nothing to back this statement up (LMAO) but I did hear this. That a burgular broke into someone's house and the dog bit them the burgular, yes the criminal could sue.
Why is that?
L
I figure if you break into my home you deserve whatever you get.
Isn't there a law that says if you shoot a criminal while they are in your home, facing you and not trying to run, that it's self defense. But if you shoot them in the back as they are fleeing your home or your property that you could get in trouble cause they were leaving.
Why can't we apply that to dog bites? If a dog bites you anywhere on the front of your body, it's protecting it's home from an intruder (assuming it is a burglar and not a kid over to play) but if they bite them in the butt or while they are running they have to be sent to obedience school...or guard dog attack school...or something (but not pts cause they were protecting the home either way)
*meant to be a humorous, yet thought provoking statement. not necessarily an idea*
Isn't there a law that says if you shoot a criminal while they are in your home, facing you and not trying to run, that it's self defense. But if you shoot them in the back as they are fleeing your home or your property that you could get in trouble cause they were leaving.
Why can't we apply that to dog bites?
If a dog bites you anywhere on the front of your body, it's protecting it's home from an intruder (assuming it is a burglar and not a kid over to play) but if they bite them in the butt or while they are running they have to be sent to obedience school...or guard dog attack school...or something (but not pts cause they were protecting the home either way)*meant to be a humorous, yet thought provoking statement. not necessarily an idea*
W
that depends on the state, I was just reading thru WI dog law and if someone enters your house without consent and gets bit, you're not liable. I forgot the case that set the precedent, but one involved a neighbor that come over to get something, and their child went into the other room and the dog bit the kid. They tried to sue, but didn't win.
On other hands though WI dog laws are very open to interpretation and it seems some people have even gone so far as to argue that a puppy chewing up a sofa was grounds for prior knowledge of being viscious and suing under the double penalty clause that allows you to collect double the damages if a dog is know to be aggressive or has in the past caused damage to humans or property, in this case the prior damage was done to a sofa. How crazy is that?? i'm sure the law was written to protect others animals, livestock and dogs that chew up others wooden fences and such, but some interpret it as chewing a sofa as a puppy is prior damage and they're entitled to double damages later
On other hands though WI dog laws are very open to interpretation and it seems some people have even gone so far as to argue that a puppy chewing up a sofa was grounds for prior knowledge of being viscious and suing under the double penalty clause that allows you to collect double the damages if a dog is know to be aggressive or has in the past caused damage to humans or property, in this case the prior damage was done to a sofa. How crazy is that?? i'm sure the law was written to protect others animals, livestock and dogs that chew up others wooden fences and such, but some interpret it as chewing a sofa as a puppy is prior damage and they're entitled to double damages later
I can tell you this... when Roxie was almost a year old. I was home alone taking a shower, she was going nuts; lunging at the window, and on a ballistic rampage. I got out of the shower, tried to get on my robe. There was a man standing on our deck. He had climbed our fence.
Before I could get the door open, she jumped thru the window after him. He beat her over the fence before she could grab him.
Now would you consider that aggression? No that was protection. He was in her territory, behind her fence, on the deck and I was alone. Thank god she was ok.
Before I could get the door open, she jumped thru the window after him. He beat her over the fence before she could grab him.
Now would you consider that aggression? No that was protection. He was in her territory, behind her fence, on the deck and I was alone. Thank god she was ok.
filarotten - That's spooky!!! Where was Brutus during this?!?!?! The pure sight of him would've scared someone off.
See, but the if Roxie got him, what about all those people that say that "once a dog has tasted blood, they'll forever want to again?"
My mom used to be one of those people. She thought that once a dog bit a person, it had to be put down because it will most definitely bite again.
See, but the if Roxie got him, what about all those people that say that "once a dog has tasted blood, they'll forever want to again?"
My mom used to be one of those people. She thought that once a dog bit a person, it had to be put down because it will most definitely bite again.
L
I don't think dogs fall into the same category as the farmers and their chicken killing wild dogs that roamed around. I guess if an animal is desperate enough, and knows whatever they attacked (and ate) was readily available and they weren't getting caught, they might be prone to attacking again. But I'm just talking about chicken killers, or sheep, or whatever other farm animals that wild dogs attack cause they have no other means of food.
If a dog tasting blood made it want to do it again I'd be dead by now...or severely mangled at least. Puppies nip and get blood all the time. It's not agression, or anything bad; they are playing and your hand gets in the way and you get a little ouchie that was an accident. If the dog lunges at your hand afterwards in an "I want blood" vampire way, then I'd be concerned. LOL... Play and accidents happen though.
If a dog tasting blood made it want to do it again I'd be dead by now...or severely mangled at least. Puppies nip and get blood all the time. It's not agression, or anything bad; they are playing and your hand gets in the way and you get a little ouchie that was an accident. If the dog lunges at your hand afterwards in an "I want blood" vampire way, then I'd be concerned. LOL...
Play and accidents happen though.
it's quite interesting that you say that, because at the very core of what the pit bull's temperament is is lack of aggression toward humans. and yet that's what this whole conversation has been about- aggression toward humans. the pit bull absolutely should *not* have "those tendencies" and they are *not* "listen in its profile".
the breed standard reads The APBT is not the best choice for a guard dog since they are extremely friendly, even with strangers. Aggressive behavior toward humans is uncharacteristic of the breed and highly undesirable..
how does that fit in with the allegations that pit bulls are dangerous, vicious, man-eaters?
why is it that we are so quick to dismiss that the most decorated war dog in american history was a pit bull. that one of the top drug-sniffing dogs in the united states is a pit bull. that some of the top SAR dogs in the country are... yup... pit bulls. alaska's first hearing assistance dog? pit bull. this is a great breed of dog. they're smart, they're fun, they're loyal, they're friendly, and yet they're loaded with such baggage.
if you want to heap requirements on prospective owners then they should be requirements of prospective owners of ALL breeds. just like in everything else.
the breed standard reads The APBT is not the best choice for a guard dog since they are extremely friendly, even with strangers. Aggressive behavior toward humans is uncharacteristic of the breed and highly undesirable..
how does that fit in with the allegations that pit bulls are dangerous, vicious, man-eaters?
why is it that we are so quick to dismiss that the most decorated war dog in american history was a pit bull. that one of the top drug-sniffing dogs in the united states is a pit bull. that some of the top SAR dogs in the country are... yup... pit bulls. alaska's first hearing assistance dog? pit bull. this is a great breed of dog. they're smart, they're fun, they're loyal, they're friendly, and yet they're loaded with such baggage.
if you want to heap requirements on prospective owners then they should be requirements of prospective owners of ALL breeds. just like in everything else.