Paw Talk - Pet Forums banner

41 - 47 of 47 Posts

·
canis lupus familiaris
Joined
·
552 Posts
I wouldn't say that there are aggressive breeds...just dominant breeds and any dominant dog can turn people/animal aggressive.

I'm against BSL but look at it from a shelter's point of view. Should they adopt out a dog so set on killing another dog that it poses a danger to the public especially when there are other dogs that aren't aggressive at all?

Now the issue with BSL is that it assumes ALL dogs of a certain breed/mix will be that way. Take my friend's old dog Lisa. She is a pitt x rottie oh man dangerous. Yeah she would nurse kittens and wouldn't kill a fly. Seriously she would nip at them then try to nudge them away haha. Same with my in law's Hannah (pit x boxer.)

I believe I posted an updated list here and there were some pretty interesting breeds on there (like pugs.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
I'm against BSL but look at it from a shelter's point of view. Should they adopt out a dog so set on killing another dog that it poses a danger to the public especially when there are other dogs that aren't aggressive at all?
Except that is NOT a breed issue, it is a DOG issue. Shelters need to evaluate INDIVIDUAL dogs. Not every dog of every breed (or mix of breeds) is going to behave the same way. I have seen some EXTREMELY dangerous dog-aggressive Labradors and Golden Retrievers, while I have also seen some EXTREMELY friendly, easy going, mild-mannered Rottweilers and pit bulls. If a dog is truly aggressive and dangerous, it should NOT be adopted out by the shelter, NO MATTER what breed it is.

The other thing to consider: Dog aggression is NOT the same as human aggression. Not everyone is capable of dealing with a dog aggressive animal, but for those people who CAN and are responsible about handling their animals, should they be told they can't keep their beloved pet?

Finally, there are varying degrees of aggression. I, personally, have NEVER met or heard of a dog, even a pit bull, who was TRULY dog aggressive in that it would try to kill every dog it ever saw. Instead, MOST of these dogs are dog selective, meaning they will get along with some dogs, but not others. That doesn't mean they are bent on killing those dogs they don't like, it just means you can't throw them in a yard together and expect them not to get in an argument. My Staffordshire/Pointer mix falls into this category, and yet despite being dog selective I can take her into public without any fears of any problems involving another dog. (The ONLY time I would ever have such a problem is if someone else came up and threw their dog into my dog's face, which honestly could result in a fight no matter what dogs are involved!) My dad's Border Collie/Labrador mix also falls into this "dog selective" category. Others are dog tolerant - in fact in my experience MOST dogs of ALL breeds fall into this category. This means the dog tolerates most other dogs, especially if those dogs follow the "rules of society" (in other words, have been socialized). It doesn't mean the dog won't fight, given the right situation, but it does mean the dog isn't out looking for a fight and would be happier avoiding fights. My Malamute/Brittany mix falls into this category. And then there is the "dog friendly" category, in which the dog loves every other dog it meets and can get along with everyone. I have know very very very very few dogs that actually fit this category. In fact, just like true, extreme dog aggression, this category seems to be an exception, just on the other end of the spectrum. I had a Rottweiler/Shepherd mix who truly fell into this category. You COULD throw any other dog into her face and she loved them immediately. I honestly can't think of any other dogs I've known who fell into this category, *maybe* one or two I'm forgetting, but most/all others fell into the "dog tolerant" or "dog selective" categories.

Where dog aggression can be a problem in those breeds bred for fighting (NOT ALL breeds who are targeted by BSL were bred for fighting though!), other kinds of aggression can be an issue in other breeds, or individual dogs. Some dogs can be extremely aggressive towards small animals. These dogs can become a danger to people with toy breeds, since those toy dogs may look like "prey" to this small animal aggressive dog. The person trying to save their little dog from attack can be bit in the process. Other dogs can be extremely food aggressive. This is actually probably a far more common problem than true dog aggression. Such a dog will guard ANYTHING it considers food, and may guard it extremely aggressively. Such dogs can pose a serious public safety threat, because you never know when you might happen upon such a dog who is guarding something it considers food. Such dogs also come out of shelters, and can become a serious threat for your average, unsuspecting dog lover who adopts such a dog. Other dogs, particularly herding breeds, can become dangerous to small children. Many herding breeds will nip and try to herd, especially when not given an outlet for their energy and instinct. Such behaviors can result in injury. If we want to start banning breeds who "might" be dog aggressive, then we need to consider these other behaviors as well. Should herding breeds also be banned, because they "might" bite a child who isn't going where the dog thinks it should go? If "dog aggressive" breeds are to be destroyed because they "might" pose a public safety hazard, then maybe we need to destroy those "small animal aggressive" Breeds as well (such as hunting breeds), because they could too pose a public safety hazard. And let's not forget the infamous food aggressive dog...

BSL does NOTHING to solve aggressive dog problems. The only thing BSL does is create a scapegoat while ignoring the true issue.
 

·
canis lupus familiaris
Joined
·
552 Posts
Except that is NOT a breed issue, it is a DOG issue. Shelters need to evaluate INDIVIDUAL dogs.
I think you are confusing me here. I'm not saying that they don't (ours just put down a big ol st bernard for not passing eval.) However you cannot save them all.

The other thing to consider: Dog aggression is NOT the same as human aggression. Not everyone is capable of dealing with a dog aggressive animal, but for those people who CAN and are responsible about handling their animals, should they be told they can't keep their beloved pet?
Those that have control don't have issues. However 99% of people don't have control, thats the problem. It is the same reason retired police dogs face the same fate as many pits. Just the other day I had to severely mace another dog because someone couldn't control their it later to find out the dog had a severe reaction to the mace. It wasn't my fault it came after me and it wasn't the dog's fault that it had that person as an owner. What I'm trying to say here is that dogs aggressive towards other dogs are just as bad as others aggressive towards people. How fair would it be that my dogs that did nothing wrong were punished because a dog known to pick and choose other dogs was allowed out of the shelter? Just because the dog won't attack me doesn't mean I don't see it as a threat to my pack.

Finally, there are varying degrees of aggression. I, personally, have NEVER met or heard of a dog, even a pit bull, who was TRULY dog aggressive in that it would try to kill every dog it ever saw.
It is sad to say that some dogs bred for fighting are trained to the point where yes they will attack anything that is a dog. Of course if we eliminated dog fighting, this problem will probably be gone as well.

BSL does NOTHING to solve aggressive dog problems. The only thing BSL does is create a scapegoat while ignoring the true issue.
I don't believe I said BSL does solve aggressive dog problems? In fact I believe I said I was against BSL.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 ·
I think you are confusing me here. I'm not saying that they don't (ours just put down a big ol st bernard for not passing eval.) However you cannot save them all.
No, I am not confusing you, I am responding to your comment of
I'm against BSL but look at it from a shelter's point of view. Should they adopt out a dog so set on killing another dog that it poses a danger to the public especially when there are other dogs that aren't aggressive at all?
If you are against BSL, why would you support it for shelters? You can't save every dog or every cat, and no where did I say you can, but why would you select certain BREEDS to destroy, which is what BSL does. Shelters need to evaluate INDIVIDUAL dogs instead of destroying dogs because they happen to be a certain breed. By evaluating INDIVIDUAL dogs regardless of breed, good dogs CAN be saved while bad dogs (no matter what breed they are) can be humanely euthanized and the public can be kept safe.


Those that have control don't have issues. However 99% of people don't have control, thats the problem. It is the same reason retired police dogs face the same fate as many pits. Just the other day I had to severely mace another dog because someone couldn't control their it later to find out the dog had a severe reaction to the mace. It wasn't my fault it came after me and it wasn't the dog's fault that it had that person as an owner. What I'm trying to say here is that dogs aggressive towards other dogs are just as bad as others aggressive towards people. How fair would it be that my dogs that did nothing wrong were punished because a dog known to pick and choose other dogs was allowed out of the shelter? Just because the dog won't attack me doesn't mean I don't see it as a threat to my pack.
And that control issue is something A LOT of people have regardless what breed or what kind of aggression it is. There are certain people's house I will NOT go to because they have no control over their dogs. While their dogs are not aggressive, they are poorly mannered, and frankly when I go over for a visit I don't want to be jumped on, period.

Again this should be an individual evaluation (of both dog and owner), NOT breed stereotyping. BSL is NOT the answer. Proper temperament testing and evaluation, and dangerous dog laws ARE. Dangerous dog laws do NOT stereotype base don breed the way BSL does. Dangerous dog laws DO evaluate the individual dog and its history. THAT is an appropriate and responsible action to take to make society safer for both people and dogs.


It is sad to say that some dogs bred for fighting are trained to the point where yes they will attack anything that is a dog. Of course if we eliminated dog fighting, this problem will probably be gone as well.
Those INDIVIDUAL dogs need to be euthanized if they are a danger to society. That does NOT mean the breeds those dogs happen to belong to are dangerous though. I have a dog who is 1/4 American Staffordshire Terrier. She is neither dog aggressive nor human aggressive, she isn't food aggressive or aggressive in any other way. She has a strong prey drive, but she is well trained enough she can manage and control that prey drive. However if BSL were in effect in my area, I would be forced to euthanize her. I would be forced to euthanize a GOOD dog because she looks like a pit bull. She may only be 1/4 American Staffordshire, but to the naive and "ignorant" public she looks all "pit bull". Even though she's been DNA tested, that 1/4 may be enough for the authorities to confiscate her. Why should my dog, who has gone through extensive training to be a good member of society, be euthanized JUST because she is part AmStaff? JUST because AmStaffs were developed from dogs who were bred for fighting?

If we start eliminating breeds based on their history, there are a LOT of breeds out there that will need elimination, more than those being currently targeted by BSL. All breeds ever bred for fighting or baiting should be eliminated, all breeds ever bred for guarding should be eliminated, because those breeds can potentially be dangerous when put in the wrong hands. We will have to include those breeds who were not actually bred for those purposes, but were bred from other breeds that were developed for those purposes, because the same behaviors and tendencies may be passed on. That list will include, but not be limited to, (and not listing all the breeds commonly targeted by BSL) Tibetan Terrier, Beaceron, Briard, Catahoula Leopard Dog and other "Cur" breeds, Plott Hound, English Coonhound, Kai Dog, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Boston Terrier, Irish Terrier, all breeds of Bulldog, all breeds of Mastiff, Great Dane, Boxer, Schipperke, Pyrenean Mountain dog, Komodor, Maremma Sheedog, Canaan Dog, the Laika breeds, Shar Pei, and Chow Chow.

Again, the individual dog, NOT the breed, needs to be considered. You can have bad dogs of ANY breeds. Labrador Retrievers have killed and maimed people, showing that even America's favorite "family dog" can be aggressive. ANY dog can be dangerous. BSL ignores that fact and instead targets innocent, GOOD dogs simply because of their breed.

I don't believe I said BSL does solve aggressive dog problems? In fact I believe I said I was against BSL.
Your statement quoted above indicates otherwise. If you are completely against BSL, you don't say "I'm against BSL, BUT" Instead you look for alternatives to BSL. My proposed alternative is dangerous dog laws and temperament testing and evaluation, which will target individual dogs instead of stereotyping by breed.
 

·
canis lupus familiaris
Joined
·
552 Posts
Of course...just throw out the part where I said

Now the issue with BSL is that it assumes ALL dogs of a certain breed/mix will be that way.
Now since you're all fluffed up and I'm laughing at you picking and choosing like a PETA member or something....

The part where I was talking about shelters putting down dogs was a response to
not all aggression is human aggression
hence why I said that regardless...aggression is aggression.

And about fighters being put down...did you miss the point? I believe it was a reply to you never seeing a dog out to kill another dog.

Go ahead, reply back. I will just get you on comprehension and understanding...but thats the problem with BSL as well. People can't comprehend and refuse to understand.

And just for the record, check under the dog section for that list. Clearly I think its a joke and so do most people there. I will take it seriously when every pit bull and every pug become severe hard core killers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Discussion Starter · #47 ·
Of course...just throw out the part where I said



Now since you're all fluffed up and I'm laughing at you picking and choosing like a PETA member or something....

The part where I was talking about shelters putting down dogs was a response to


hence why I said that regardless...aggression is aggression.

And about fighters being put down...did you miss the point? I believe it was a reply to you never seeing a dog out to kill another dog.

Go ahead, reply back. I will just get you on comprehension and understanding...but thats the problem with BSL as well. People can't comprehend and refuse to understand.

And just for the record, check under the dog section for that list. Clearly I think its a joke and so do most people there. I will take it seriously when every pit bull and every pug become severe hard core killers.
You can't be against BSL while at the same time insinuating it is useful for shelters, which is what your statement DID do.

As for the rest of your post - Resorting to insults, as you are now doing, is a sign you know you've lost the argument. So you can laugh all you want, but really the joke's on you. ;)
 
41 - 47 of 47 Posts
Top