Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 12:31 am  

I don't wish to start a debate about the character of various breads. But, why do I have to read and listen to the horrific details of children mauled to death by dogs (or a dog) on such a regular basis? It seams to me that the political will to solve the problem is absent due to the number of voters who are dog lovers ( I am not one, I have healthy normal relationships).

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 3:40 am  

With an average of two peopled killed by dogs per year, why aren't we having a debate about the number of people killed by cars?

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:52 am  

1905 wrote:

I don't wish to start a debate about the character of various breads. But, why do I have to read and listen to the horrific details of children mauled to death by dogs (or a dog) on such a regular basis? It seams to me that the political will to solve the problem is absent due to the number of voters who are dog lovers ( I am not one, I have healthy normal relationships).

Your starter for ten is : Identify a dangerous dog so that a viable law can be passed to ban its type, breed or just look-alikey.


Politicians have struggled with this for decades.

Truth is that there is no way to identify a type or breed of dog that will attack humans, there are however human behavior patterns that will encourage any sort of dog to attack in certain circumstances, usually when it feels threatened and you as a human won't always understand why a dog feels threatened, you'd understand more if you were brought up with or around dogs but as you weren't then you will struggle to understand their requirements and psychology.

To put it very, very simply, in my family and over the past thirty years I have had three German Shepherds and a Golden Retriever, during that time I have raised two children to adulthood and at various times have had a house full of their friends all behaving like young children do, none of the dogs (other than the one I note below) I have owned have ever threatened any of those children, mainly because an adult (me or the wife) that the dog trusted has taken control of the situation and kept the dog in its "safe" place well away from a house full of screaming rampaging kids - its what you have to do as a responsible owner.

My current male GSD is a large example of the breed and weighs almost 40kg, and soft and obedient as he is I would not leave him alone with a child under 16 years of age, or indeed with a stranger of any age - he has expectations and requirements from his human family, he has a routine and his own space in the house and children are just too unpredictable with dogs, they are not toys.

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 6:57 am  

1905 wrote:

I don't wish to start a debate about the character of various breads. But, why do I have to read and listen to the horrific details of children mauled to death by dogs (or a dog) on such a regular basis? It seams to me that the political will to solve the problem is absent due to the number of voters who are dog lovers ( I am not one, I have healthy normal relationships).

Maybe because owners don't take the time or effort to train the dog or read at least one book on dog behaviour? Or in the recent case, keep a dog in a one bedroomed flat and (according to a neighbour) never take the dog out?

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:00 am  

Just to add, one of the German Shepherds I had was euthanised at 18 months of age because it was VERY unpredictable in a house with 10 year old kids around all the time and after it had demonstrated this behavior over a period of time - again that is part of being a responsible owner, probably won't win me any friends but there you are.

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:28 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

Just to add, one of the German Shepherds I had was euthanised at 18 months of age because it was VERY unpredictable in a house with 10 year old kids around all the time and after it had demonstrated this behavior over a period of time - again that is part of being a responsible owner, probably won't win me any friends but there you are.

Well, I for one applaud you. It shows that you understood your dogs behaviour and that he was too unpredictable, even if he went to a child free home. I'm sure any vet or behaviourist would have given you this advice too.

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:34 am  

Hull White Star wrote:

Well, I for one applaud you. It shows that you understood your dogs behaviour and that he was too unpredictable, even if he went to a child free home. I'm sure any vet or behaviourist would have given you this advice too.

It was the RSPCA who ultimately advised us, they refused to take the dog into their kennels after we explained her behavior and advised that we would be incredibly irresponsible to offer her up for adoption in those circumstances and that there was only one solution, harsh but true.

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:31 am  

1905 wrote:

... the number of voters who are dog lovers ( I am not one, I have healthy normal relationships).

Blimey. That's a good way to endear yourself to people.

Are you seriously suggesting that all dog lovers have 'unhealthy', 'abnormal' relationships? Really?

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:47 am  

Mintball wrote:

Blimey. That's a good way to endear yourself to people.

Are you seriously suggesting that all dog lovers have 'unhealthy', 'abnormal' relationships? Really?

Double whammy for me. On two consecutive threads I have been accused of being a benefit cheat and because of having dogs; I have unhealthy, abnormal relationships! Only on Sin Bin

Re: Dogs : Thu Nov 07, 2013 3:03 pm  

Its not dogs which are the problem, but people and circumstance. There are certain dogs and breeds which need a certain environment. Keep them in that environment and you wont have a problem, put them in an unsuitable one and you will.

A rescue dog of the size and breed reported in this instance is entirely unsuitable for a young family