Womans Arm Severed By Dog

[hastey]

These arguments always frustrate me. On one hand we push the fact that if you choose a purebred dog you KNOW what its temperament will be like. You KNOW what its characteristics will be like. It is a genetic line we follow, we breed for temperament yadda, yadda and now suddenly we say "Hell no, a dog isn't born aggressive, it is the upbringing that makes it aggressive!"

This. Is. Total. CRAP!

A Pug is NOT aggressive. It is born that way. It is genetics. It has NOTHING to do with the upbringing. If I can say that a dog is born without aggression, why then can't it be said that some dogs are born with aggression?

Sure, the Pitbull may be maligned, but the argument that a dog is created and not born, is dumb.

While careful selective breeding does increase the predictability of characteristics, to ignore the basic fact that like us humans, dogs are a product of their environment and experiences, is ignorant.

A dog may start it's life with the best genetic building blocks, but ignore it's social requirements and mistreat it and you have the potential to turn ANY dog into a threat.... and yes from my experience, Pugs included.

Our responsibility should not end with breeding, dog ownership is education, care, obedience and monitoring, in order to ensure a stable dog through all its stages of growth. Every breed has it's own unique traits, whether good or bad, it's understanding these traits that can help us nurture the desirable and discourage/prevent the undesirable.

I feel for the poor lady, and can't even imagine how horrific it may be

We don't know the full facts and probably never will, so understanding the dog's actions is only speculation.

[Jed]

Whippets

So......when someone else shows that they can google pit sites and be able to use the Copy & Paste feature on their computer (bravo to you) I also feel inclined to reply to their "twaddle" as you call it. Hell bugger all of that is you own words. You just plagiarise someone elses opinion. So don't go taking any credit for what other people have applauded you for... whatsoever.

Because they have the greater depth of knowledge on the subject.

And the quoted pieces are NOT my words, which is why they are in quotations. People are not applauding me for the quotes, but for my stance against BSL.

Plagiarising is using someone else's words as your own. I did not do that.

And I would prefer to show that you are wrong by using expert opinion, to back my own views.

Why should anyone believe what I say? No reason at all. Much better to quote people who do know, and let others make up their minds.

It is people like you who will bring the dog world down, because you can't understand, and will not believe that BSL is wrong. Whilst BSL is promoted, seriously aggressive dogs are still running around. Have the bite stats decreased since BSL?

Not at all.

So, the government has killed tens of thousands of dogs, so people would be safe from these crazed killers.

Yet the bite stats have not fallen.

Are these good laws you are promoting?

Why?

And did your brother's dogs suddenly turn and kill someone? How many times?

Dogs attack, not breeds.

Ban the deed, not the breed.

If the government was serious about stopping dog attacks, and they believed that breed bans would do it, they would ban the ACD, German Shepherd, and the other 2 breeds which top the list of breeds which perpetrate the most attacks, whatever those breeds are.

[Greytmate]

irregardless

Is not a word.

But it is a scientific fact that a dog's temperament is mostly genetic... I didn't know that there was much of a question about it. Most vets/breeders/researchers agree on this.

No it may not be in all lines of a particular breed, but temperament is mostly determined by that of the dogs in it's pedigree. Whether that be shy, aggressive, friendly etc.

It mostly is. But there are a large number people that do not see that, and do not understand what the differences are.

[huski]

irregardless

Is not a word.

And that's what I get for staying up late when I've been sick LOL But thanks for pointing it out...

But it is a scientific fact that a dog's temperament is mostly genetic... I didn't know that there was much of a question about it. Most vets/breeders/researchers agree on this.

No it may not be in all lines of a particular breed, but temperament is mostly determined by that of the dogs in it's pedigree. Whether that be shy, aggressive, friendly etc.

So you think majority of dogs who display aggression do so purely because they were born that way? You don't think the way we raise, socialise and train our dogs plays a significant part in the way our dogs behave?

A puppy who is attacked by another dog in their fear period, and starts to exhibit dog aggression as a result, was born that way and the behaviour was not something that was influenced by a bad experience in it's most crucial development phase? 80% of a dog's brain develops by the time it's 16 weeks of age, we know enough about the way dogs develop to understand the importance of appropriate socialiation during their critical development phase.

Take two puppies from the same litter. Put one in a home where it is not socialised outside of the home, that does not leave the house until it's at least 16 weeks (fully vaccinated). Whose owners do not commit much if any time to training their dog. Whose first experience outside of the home is being taken to a busy dog park where a group of bigger dogs rush to the gate the moment it comes in and crowd over it.

Put one puppy in a home where it's owners are quite dog savvy and ensure it is socialised adequately from the day it is bought home at eight weeks. Pup is taken out and about, exposed to many different positive experiences and is engaged in training from day one. Pup is introduced to friendly dogs in a controlled environment.

Both puppies come from the same breeding, the same litter, were for the first eight weeks raised in the same way. Yet do you think both puppies will grow into the same, confident, happy, well adjusted and well behaved adult dogs? Does one have a better chance than the other or are they both going to be the same regardless because they both came from good breeding and that's enough to guarantee our dogs will grow up to be good canine citizens? Why bother putting any emphasis on socialising and training our dogs at all if most of their temperament is genetic anyway?

Edited March 24, 2010 by huski

[Bindii]

But it is a scientific fact that a dog's temperament is mostly genetic... I didn't know that there was much of a question about it. Most vets/breeders/researchers agree on this.

No it may not be in all lines of a particular breed, but temperament is mostly determined by that of the dogs in it's pedigree. Whether that be shy, aggressive, friendly etc.

So you think majority of dogs who display aggression do so purely because they were born that way? You don't think the way we raise, socialise and train our dogs plays a significant part in the way our dogs behave?

A puppy who is attacked by another dog in their fear period, and starts to exhibit dog aggression as a result, was born that way and the behaviour was not something that was influenced by a bad experience in it's most crucial development phase? 80% of a dog's brain develops by the time it's 16 weeks of age, we know enough about the way dogs develop to understand the importance of appropriate socialiation during their critical development phase.

Take two puppies from the same litter. Put one in a home where it is not socialised outside of the home, that does not leave the house until it's at least 16 weeks (fully vaccinated). Whose owners do not commit much if any time to training their dog. Whose first experience outside of the home is being taken to a busy dog park where a group of bigger dogs rush to the gate the moment it comes in and crowd over it.

Put one puppy in a home where it's owners are quite dog savvy and ensure it is socialised adequately from the day it is bought home at eight weeks. Pup is taken out and about, exposed to many different positive experiences and is engaged in training from day one. Pup is introduced to friendly dogs in a controlled environment.

Both puppies come from the same breeding, the same litter, were for the first eight weeks raised in the same way. Yet do you think both puppies will grow into the same, confident, happy, well adjusted and well behaved adult dogs? Does one have a better chance than the other or are they both going to be the same regardless because they both came from good breeding and that's enough to guarantee our dogs will grow up to be good canine citizens?

Hence, i said mostly.

Mostly Samoyeds are caring, trustworthy, loyal, and snuggly because those that displayed these qualities have been chosen for years over those that don't. Mostly Samoyeds will not show signs of aggression - no matter how they are brought up - new owner, kenneled dogs, dog savvy owners etc etc. I say mostly for the sake of this discussion... but i've actually never met one that doesn't display this quality. Because it is in their genetic make up and has been for years. But i say mostly because i guess if a dog was treated extremely poorly it would lose it's trust of mankind... however, i believe it could easily be rehabilitated because, genetically, they are not that way.

If it is true that this dog had never attacked or shown signs of aggression before (as some reports have stated) then i don't feel it has anything to do with upbringing. It sounds more like a neurological disorder.

Did something happen to you DA dog to make him DA? and regardless (snigger) of this, have you had much luck training the dog aggression out of him?

Edit: Sorry i forgot to answer your initial question - yes i feel that the majority of dogs that show aggression are this way because they are born that way. Not only, but mostly. But yes i agree that with training they have a better chance, and with the right owner they might never be aggressive (but they are born with the tendency, so in the wrong hands it would be bad) In the same way that we all agree that no breed is bad, only the owners.

Edited March 24, 2010 by Bindii

[huski]

If it is true that this dog had never attacked or shown signs of aggression before (as some reports have stated) then i don't feel it has anything to do with upbringing.

How can we ever know when some reports have said it has shown previous signs of aggression and some even say the male owner (who is apparently in jail for the next three years) encouraged him to fight/act aggressively?

Did something happen to you DA dog to make him DA? and regardless (snigger) of this, have you had much luck training the dog aggression out of him?

Yes, he was attacked several times as a young pup/dog (he is fear aggressive).

He was great with other dogs before being attacked and continues to be great with dogs he knows now. It is a certain type of dog that will trigger him (bigger, in your face, excitable type dogs). He's not remotely aggressive or even dominant with dogs he knows or is comfortable with. With training his aggression can be quite easily managed and has improved hugely, training a DA dog is about teaching them they have an option other than aggression not simply "training it out of them" - you can train a DA dog so you have excellent control over them but curing them is often not possible and depends on the dog. He will not ever be the kind of dog that can be taken to the dog park to run around with a heap of strange dogs, not just because of his "issues" but because while I can control him quite easily, controlling other dogs is not so simple.

He comes from good breeding and his temperament is perfect in every other way, he is a happy, gentle, calm, lovely dog. The behaviourist who assessed him for me commented on what a calm and beautiful natured dog he is.

I truly believe that had he been socialised more appropriately and had been exposed to positive experiences instead of negative ones, he would not be remotely DA.

Edited March 24, 2010 by huski

[huski]

Edit: Sorry i forgot to answer your initial question - yes i feel that the majority of dogs that show aggression are this way because they are born that way. Not only, but mostly. But yes i agree that with training they have a better chance, and with the right owner they might never be aggressive (but they are born with the tendency, so in the wrong hands it would be bad) In the same way that we all agree that no breed is bad, only the owners.

Hmm, many trainers/behaviourists you talk to about aggression would disagree with you that the majority of dogs that display aggression were simply born that way. The vast majority of aggression is fear based and when you consider the number of aggressive dogs out there, ranging just about any breed, that's a hell of a lot of dogs just "born like that".

I find it depressingly naive and quite honestly terrifying to hear that people think the majority of aggressive dogs were just born like that, with no influence from the environment in which they were raised

All dogs are born with the ability to display aggression.

ETA:

however, i believe it could easily be rehabilitated because, genetically, they are not that way.

IMO, how easily a dog can be rehabilitated depends on more than it's genetics. Say the dog is fear aggressive - how successfully it can be managed would depend on how long it had been able to learn that aggression was the way to deal with xyz situation, how ingrained the behaviour had become, how severe the aggression was, how capable the owner was to train and handle a DA dog etc etc.

Edited March 24, 2010 by huski

[Bindii]

All dogs are born with the ability to display aggression.

The ability, maybe.. But some are born with the tendency.

Of course i am not denying that upbringing - including socialisation from a puppy's mother and litter mates and beyond - plays an enormous part in a dogs temperament, but most comes from genetics. JMHO coming from not only my personal experience but from those around me and studies that i have completed and from extra research and readings because frankly i do find the topic fascinating. Still just an opinion - which I thought was held by most (as i said in my first post in this thread) but it seems not!

Edited March 24, 2010 by Bindii

[huski]

I'm not denying a lot of what makes our dogs what they are comes from genetics, that's why I always buy purebeds from good breeders. But we cannot discount the massive effect that environment has on them too. Not just with aggression but behaviour full stop. By playing down the importance of environment it removes our responsibilities as owners to raise, train and socialize our dogs appropriately. I cannot tell you the number of people I have run into with a dog they can barely control on the end of leash who despair because they bought x breed or xy cross expecting it to just grow up and be the perfect dog.

I've run into my fair share of DA labs, BCs, oodles, goldies, SWFs - These dogs weren't all born aggressive. They are not breeds where aggression is bred for or desirable. Yet it happens.

[aquaticmalamute]

Edit: Sorry i forgot to answer your initial question - yes i feel that the majority of dogs that show aggression are this way because they are born that way. Not only, but mostly. But yes i agree that with training they have a better chance, and with the right owner they might never be aggressive (but they are born with the tendency, so in the wrong hands it would be bad) In the same way that we all agree that no breed is bad, only the owners.

Hmm, many trainers/behaviourists you talk to about aggression would disagree with you that the majority of dogs that display aggression were simply born that way. The vast majority of aggression is fear based and when you consider the number of aggressive dogs out there, ranging just about any breed, that's a hell of a lot of dogs just "born like that".

I find it depressingly naive and quite honestly terrifying to hear that people think the majority of aggressive dogs were just born like that, with no influence from the environment in which they were raised

All dogs are born with the ability to display aggression.

I have to stick up for Bindii, as she makes a very good point.

I don't intend to discuss this any further than this post, as I know you have a very strong opinion Huski (which you are entitled to) and are quite happy to drum it into everyone else without considering that just possibly the other person's differing opinion might just be right.

I firmly believe that behaviour (good or bad) is predominantly genetic. Granted alot is learnt, but a dogs behaviour and how it deals with situations is based on its genetic profile. A dog who is genetically aggressive can either end up in the right hands and be either trained to contol its aggression to a certain extent, or kept in a situation where it never has the opportunity to express or learn its genetic potential. Or it can be placed in the wrong hands, who either exploit it's natural tendancies or simply do not understand/lack the knowledge to know any better and the dog is allowed to develop a behaviour that it was born to exhibit.

Outside factors such as upbringing are a huge influence as well, but a learned behaviour can be controlled with proper training. Inherited behaviour can only be curbed to an extent, and I believe (and have read) that it can never be trained out of a dog.

Please take my own dog as an example. He has had a near perfect upbringing. Socialization daily with different breeds of all ages and sexes, never had a bad encounter with a dog or a person. He was always a worrier as a pup, cautious in new situations, refused to deficate on strange land etc. I never sooked/coddled/paid him attention when he got anxious, I went along like there was nothing to worry about - he was rewarded for relaxed body language though.

He has what you call 'fear based aggression' but his is not learned, it a fearful dispositon that was inherited.

At about 8 months a switch flicked. He would whine (loudly) when he heard a nosie, if he didn't instantly know what it was it would set him off. Strange dogs would turn him into a screaming mess and he would lash out aggressively as he didn't know how else to deal with the situaltion (obviously flight wasn't on the agenda and he chose the fight route). He diverted his aggression onto my bitch who was in easy reach, opposed to the strange noise on the other side of the fence or any dog that wasn't in easy reach. To an extent his DA is learnt, how he made the decision in the first place that this was they way to deal with his anxiety is obviously stemming from his genetic background. We were baffled as to why he behaved this way, untill his sires owner (in Europe) admitted that my dogs sire is 'a worrier'. So much so that she isn't interested in her dogs progeny at all.

We have been working with a behavioural vet to help him with his anxiety. And if I don't follow our routine to the Tee we start having problems again, he is a very sensitive dog, in fact the last week we have had a house being built next door and there are strange people wandering around there all day. Yep, out of routine and we are back to square one - no matter how hard we try, getting him to learn to relax is a slow and hard slog - trying to teach a dog to exhibit the opposite behaviour to one that is so deeply ingrained genetically isn't for the 'average pet owner'.

I personally know of a few dogs (one in particular has sired over a hundred progeny), who is incredibly human aggressive, and it's showing itself in the offspring, in alot of them - now try and tell me that these pups are all learnt to become aggressive and it has nothing to do with genetics. Now this is a breed that should NEVER show aggression to humans, if so it should be desexed and removed from the gene pool (IMO). These aggressive puppies are quite widespread in location, in a relatively rare and human friendly breed. Like I said, dogs who have aggression in their genes should be placed in knowledgeable homes who can control the dogs effectively and understand that they will never be 100% reliable. Aggression is genetically ingrained in alot of breeds, many breeds of which should never be so - it is not a suprise to learn that so many dogs out there are aggressive. Bad temperaments run rampet in BYB dogs, and even sadly in some show lines (temperment should never be sacraficed in a breeding programme, no matter how successful the dog is in the ring).

That said, the problem lies at the other end of the lead. People shouldn't breed dogs with bad temperaments and place them in the average 'pet home' with people who have no clue how to manage a dog who is potentially a ticking time bomb.

Edited March 24, 2010 by aquaticmalamute

[kyliegirl]

lets put this dog breeding talk into human context.

pitbulls are born aggressive -

So a human child who is born from say a father who is a murderer and a mother who is extremely aggressive and abusive means the child will turn out to be an aggressive killer?

you could claim a mother who births a child who's father was actually a rapist is giving life to another rapist.

ridiculous..

forget the fact that in the breed standard for pitbulls aggression is not bred for. Every animal is an individual, while yes sometimes the breeding of two aggressive dogs CAN cause the young to inherit this behaviour, there will always be a case of two wrongs making a right, so two negative dogs will make a positive dog. I dont believe a species should be condemned because a few of that one species killed people.. It would be the equivalent of wiping out a country because a few of the people from that country were terrorists.

[Guest Tess32]

lets put this dog breeding talk into human context.

pitbulls are born aggressive -

So a human child who is born from say a father who is a murderer and a mother who is extremely aggressive and abusive means the child will turn out to be an aggressive killer?

you could claim a mother who births a child who's father was actually a rapist is giving life to another rapist.

ridiculous..

forget the fact that in the breed standard for pitbulls aggression is not bred for. Every animal is an individual, while yes sometimes the breeding of two aggressive dogs CAN cause the young to inherit this behaviour, there will always be a case of two wrongs making a right, so two negative dogs will make a positive dog. I dont believe a species should be condemned because a few of that one species killed people.. It would be the equivalent of wiping out a country because a few of the people from that country were terrorists.

That makes no sense.

Of COURSE some dogs have temperaments that increases the liklihood of the dog using aggression.

People can't have it both ways - you can't go around arguing that buying a purebred, reg dog means you'll get a predictable temperament (ie, due to breeding/genes) and then say that the 'negative' aspects of a temperament aren't inherited.

There's no such thing as an 'aggressive dog', aggression is not a temperament, it's a means of communication. Dogs who have X Y or Z types of temperaments, are going to be more likely to USE this mode of communication than others. And I believe that is true regardless of the environment.

To use my own dog as an eg, he is mostly a very sweet, friendly dog. But he has never coped with stress well since he was a very young puppy, and this inability to lead to stress well and this kind of temperament, given the 'right' conditions, could lead to fight instead of flight. It doesn't mean he's an 'aggressive dog', but his base temperament is genetic.

[sandgrubber]

Try it the other way around ... aggression can be bred out. In some breeds that has been done quite successfully. You will get very frustrated trying to make a shutzhound out of a well-bred Labrador. In other breeds some attack tendencies have been preserved because the dogs are used for guarding. You can get throwbacks to 'wild' levels of aggression in any breed. And the 'preserved' aggressive traits in some breeds may turn out to be hard to control, or easy to encourage/set off in some individuals. There are also dogs who are sick in the head and aggressive because of it (I have a toy poodle who comes to my kennel who bites everyone, including her owner, and has done so from an early age).

It seems to be common for dogs that are aggressive in the breeding are loyal, protective, and gentle to family members. Read the breed standard for the filho Brasilioro for a demonstration of this.

[HugUrPup]

So a human child who is born from say a father who is a murderer and a mother who is extremely aggressive and abusive means the child will turn out to be an aggressive killer?

sometimes.

The nature vs nurture debate has been going on forever.. most conclude that both play a part, probably equal parts.

There have been twin studies done, where one twin brought up by a totally different family in another country, who never met his twin brother, still shared very similar personalities and even had the same food preferences and dress sense.

It's not uncommon for identical twins to marry another set of identical twins either.

The biological inheritance of personality traits and disposition to aggressive behaviours are real in humans, so I have no doubt they are real in other animals also.

[WreckitWhippet]

Dogs are canines, they are not feline, bovine, human or anything else and people draw the long bow when they attempt to make comparisions and analogies.

If you want to talk about temperament, then speak specifics.

[Kavik]

lets put this dog breeding talk into human context.

pitbulls are born aggressive -

So a human child who is born from say a father who is a murderer and a mother who is extremely aggressive and abusive means the child will turn out to be an aggressive killer?

you could claim a mother who births a child who's father was actually a rapist is giving life to another rapist.

ridiculous..

forget the fact that in the breed standard for pitbulls aggression is not bred for. Every animal is an individual, while yes sometimes the breeding of two aggressive dogs CAN cause the young to inherit this behaviour, there will always be a case of two wrongs making a right, so two negative dogs will make a positive dog. I dont believe a species should be condemned because a few of that one species killed people.. It would be the equivalent of wiping out a country because a few of the people from that country were terrorists.

That makes no sense.

Of COURSE some dogs have temperaments that increases the liklihood of the dog using aggression.

People can't have it both ways - you can't go around arguing that buying a purebred, reg dog means you'll get a predictable temperament (ie, due to breeding/genes) and then say that the 'negative' aspects of a temperament aren't inherited.

There's no such thing as an 'aggressive dog', aggression is not a temperament, it's a means of communication. Dogs who have X Y or Z types of temperaments, are going to be more likely to USE this mode of communication than others. And I believe that is true regardless of the environment.

To use my own dog as an eg, he is mostly a very sweet, friendly dog. But he has never coped with stress well since he was a very young puppy, and this inability to lead to stress well and this kind of temperament, given the 'right' conditions, could lead to fight instead of flight. It doesn't mean he's an 'aggressive dog', but his base temperament is genetic.

I agree with Tess

Genetic potential is inherited, but how that eventuates depends on experience. A dog may genetically have a lower threshold to something which could cause it to become aggressive (to people or other dogs), how it is raised, trained and its experiences determine whether the dog becomes aggressive or not.

Zoe does not have a stable temperament - skittish, always had a tendency to hide under things. She became dog aggressive. While the tendency was always there as her temperament is not great, if I had done things differently with her exposure to other dogs (not taken her to dog parks where she got intimidated), and if I knew the focus techniques I now do (that have made improvements) she may not be as bad as she is.

Goes for good attributes too. The potential for a good sheep working dog/sports dog/racing dog/earth dog/security dog is genetic but whether they reach that potential depends on training and experience.

Edited March 24, 2010 by Kavik

[HugUrPup]

Ok, most ethical breeders won't breed from aggressive dogs. That pretty much says to me, that it's a known fact that aggression is passed down.

Most Pit bull breeders preferred to breed from aggressive fighting dogs, so there is a very long line of aggression in them and even though you may be able to breed the aggression out, it would take a very very long time.

What's the point anyway.. all breeds can potentially be aggressive, even the ones who weren't bred from generations of killers can snap for one reason or another.

The problem with the dogs on the BSL are the fact that they do so much damage when they do snap. I also believe that the reason so many PB's are involved in attacks is because every man and his dog (excuse the pun) has one.. they are a pretty popular breed especially for a banned one.

[Kavik]

So that is where good breeding practices come into it for breeding dogs with good genetic potential and then selecting the best owners who can explore most that potential and know how to work with the potentially difficult parts of the dog's temperament.

The difficult part of this with APBT is that since they are not a registered breed and you are not legally allowed to breed them, is that there are no tabs on people who do decide to breed and they may breed dogs with dodgy temperaments and not sell them to knowledgeable owners.

Selecting the right dog, knowing the potentially good and bad things about the breed, train accordingly - whatever the breed

[poodlefan]

Have there been any updates on how Mrs Bonic is doing?

[huski]

I firmly believe that behaviour (good or bad) is predominantly genetic. Granted alot is learnt, but a dogs behaviour and how it deals with situations is based on its genetic profile. A dog who is genetically aggressive can either end up in the right hands and be either trained to contol its aggression to a certain extent, or kept in a situation where it never has the opportunity to express or learn its genetic potential. Or it can be placed in the wrong hands, who either exploit it's natural tendancies or simply do not understand/lack the knowledge to know any better and the dog is allowed to develop a behaviour that it was born to exhibit.

I've not said once that the potential for aggression can't be inherited, I totally agree there are some breeds who may be more likely to develop aggressive tendancies especially if they are not raised or managed properly - Staranais's Malinois is a perfect example of that. In the wrong hands her dog could become aggressive, but in the right hands she can become a wonderful working dog who has an excellent, stable temperament. That is dependent on how the dog is raised, not it's genetics.

But we simply cannot blame the majority of aggression that dogs display on simply being genetics. That removes any responsibility that we have as owners to choose an appropriate breed, raise and train it properly.

Let me give you an example: I have a beagle. We all know that beagles being hounds have pretty soft nerve, they are bred to be merry (according to the breed standard) little dogs that love their people, other animals and get on with everyone.

At around six months old my beagle growled, snapped and bit me when I tried to remove her from the lounge (on more than one occasion).

Is this is a reflection of genetics? No, it was poor leadership on my behalf that led to my dog thinking she could lay claim on whatever she wanted and boss me around. I learned to handle her the right way - it not only never happened again, but I can pick her up and move her off whatever piece of furniture I like without any problems.

Please don't think I am discounting the importance of genetics or proper breeding. It just makes me feel sick in the stomach to think that people will pass off the majority of aggression displayed by dogs as something you can't do anything about because they were just born that way. Why even bother to raise, socialise and train our dogs if (according to some posters here) you could lock certain breeds in a kennel and treat it like shit and it will still come out the other end a perfect, happy, well adjusted dog.

That said, the problem lies at the other end of the lead. People shouldn't breed dogs with bad temperaments and place them in the average 'pet home' with people who have no clue how to manage a dog who is potentially a ticking time bomb.

Then I'd assume that means you won't breed from your dog?

Edited March 24, 2010 by huski