Child Killed By Dog

[sandgrubber]

I can see Matthew's point to a degree. While all breeds can bite, some are bred for temperaments that are likely to become a hazard. Take the bull breeds out of the picture because many people have loving investments in t hem. Let's look at the temperament description for the Mountain Cur, a US landrace that, so far as I know, isn't found in Australia. I don't think this breed should be welcomed to suburban or urban environments. 'Cat' here is likely to mean mountain lion; a 'razor back' is a wild boar. Underlining and colour changes in original.

This is not a submissive, easygoing dog. With the toughness and courage to confront a very angry, very large cat, these curs have learned to be decisive and dauntless. Usually silent on the trail, they make consistent guard dogs but certainly are not ideal for suburbia, where there is no call to work. Trailing ability varies with strains, but they have enough nose to follow game and many carry treeing ability. Some lines are bred for tree dogs and others for baying. This very tough large game, raccoon, and squirrel hunter is willing to face a squealing razor back or an angry wild cat when it is cornered. They have a strong desire to please their master. Very protective of the property and family; and without an owner who is more dominant than themselves they can become over-protective. The Mountain Cur is noted for his courage. This hunting dog will catch a mad bull head- on in the nose and will hold his ground even against a bear when threatened. The objective in training this dog is to achieve a pack leader status. It is a natural instinct for a dog to have an order in their pack. When we humans live with dogs, we become their pack. The entire pack cooperates under a single leader. Lines are clearly defined and rules are set. Because a dog communicates his displeasure with growling and eventually biting, all other humans MUST be higher up in the order than the dog. The humans must be the ones making the decisions, not the dogs. That is the only way your relationship with your dog can be a complete success.

[Aidan3]

It's just so callous to call for action that all available evidence tells us will not help, when children's safety is at stake. I can understand people being ignorant of the facts, but surely it behooves politicians who make these laws to make the enquiry, consult with the people we fund to research these issues, see what the experience in other jurisdictions has been, and then make an informed decision?

What other area of public health would we allow legislators to ride so rough-shod over, so willingly?

[Aidan3]

I can see Matthew's point to a degree. While all breeds can bite, some are bred for temperaments that are likely to become a hazard. Take the bull breeds out of the picture because many people have loving investments in t hem. Let's look at the temperament description for the Mountain Cur, a US landrace that, so far as I know, isn't found in Australia. I don't think this breed should be welcomed to suburban or urban environments. 'Cat' here is likely to mean mountain lion; a 'razor back' is a wild boar. Underlining and colour changes in original.

This is not a submissive, easygoing dog. With the toughness and courage to confront a very angry, very large cat, these curs have learned to be decisive and dauntless. Usually silent on the trail, they make consistent guard dogs but certainly are not ideal for suburbia, where there is no call to work. Trailing ability varies with strains, but they have enough nose to follow game and many carry treeing ability. Some lines are bred for tree dogs and others for baying. This very tough large game, raccoon, and squirrel hunter is willing to face a squealing razor back or an angry wild cat when it is cornered. They have a strong desire to please their master. Very protective of the property and family; and without an owner who is more dominant than themselves they can become over-protective. The Mountain Cur is noted for his courage. This hunting dog will catch a mad bull head- on in the nose and will hold his ground even against a bear when threatened. The objective in training this dog is to achieve a pack leader status. It is a natural instinct for a dog to have an order in their pack. When we humans live with dogs, we become their pack. The entire pack cooperates under a single leader. Lines are clearly defined and rules are set. Because a dog communicates his displeasure with growling and eventually biting, all other humans MUST be higher up in the order than the dog. The humans must be the ones making the decisions, not the dogs. That is the only way your relationship with your dog can be a complete success.

Well if you believe (as the author of this piece seems to) that dogs go around fighting and biting to establish dominance at any opportunity they get, then a ban on any dog seems like a very good idea.

[sandgrubber]

Well if you believe (as the author of this piece seems to) that dogs go around fighting and biting to establish dominance at any opportunity they get, then a ban on any dog seems like a very good idea.

Aren't you fighting fire with fire here? Ie, looking for the part of the post with which you have a quarrel (exaggerating the alpha dog stuff) and ignoring the more substantive part (tough dog bred for big game, courageous, not recommended as a pet). Your moniker suggests that sympathetic rather than argumentative listening would be better. I think that some breeds are less fit for urban/suburban situations than others, on average. Not sure how to use that in policy design. I'm no policy expert. But I think that denial causes more problems than it solves; and you're going to have a hard time convincing most owners of small/gentle breeds that their dogs need the same measure of control as pig dogs and other dogs bred for courage in the hunt or the ring. Even pit bull advocates (see, eg. http://www.workingpitbull.com/whydodogsbite.htm) agree that dogs from fighting stock are a problem with irresponsible owners. The policy challenge is how to prevent the morons from owning the wrong sort of dog. I don't know how to do this without putting hardship on responsible owners.

Btw, I think the bull breeds were more often bred for bull baiting and bear baiting than dog fighting. Bull baiting was dying out in the 1800's when bans came into effect. Dog fighting grew as bull baiting ceased because it's much easier to conceal a dog fighting event than a bull-baiting event. Most stud dog registries were closed after bull baiting was banned, and modern dog breeds, in general, weren't established until after that time.

Btw, I haven't spent much time around hunting dog packs in the US south . . . but I suspect that doing so would increase my support for 'alpha' theories. I keep Labbies, and find the 'alpha' theory is pretty useless for my dogs.

btw., Your moniker isn't correct. Backburning is effective, and often more used in wildland fires than water.

[Kavik]

Matthew

You are aware that there are many breeds that have been and are bred for guarding/protection/security purposes? And other breeds that were used for dogfighting?

[raz]

Has anyone heard any murmerings from the companion animals task force meeting yesterday? I cant find a thing about it.

[conztruct]

Matthew - such a shame to have to go through that. I know what you mean though - I was bailed up by a BTX in the street as a I went for a walk one day - it came from a yard that had no fence and the inhabitants were sitting on the verandah having a giggle as the dog gestured, growled and curled up it's lips. Scary experience but I got away from it unscathed no thanks to the stupid owners.

Sure if the dog was banned, I wouldn't have got bailed up or maybe I would have because these people would have just got another breed and raised it as poorly. What was more apparent to me is that if these owners had their dog (no matter what breed) contained in their yard as they should have or had even bothered to call it off or help instead of having a laugh, it would have been the same result - I wouldn't have been bailed up.

I now own that same breed and love them - my dogs are all awesome and very docile because that's the way I've raised them. But at the same time, I am serious about my obligation to be a responsible owner and my dogs are contained so they can not get out and annoy people even if it is just being friendly. It is true that a number of breeds were originally bred for fighting (dogs), but you'd be hard-pressed to find any registered breeders who breed for this purpose. I can't however, speak for the bogans who cross all sorts of things and treat them like crap to intentionally make them a volatile menace, however, that is not restricted to any particular breed or cross, again, it is the owner.

I doubt there's anything that can change your mind about banning APBTs given the traumatic experience you've experienced and this is undoubtedly the basis of your hysterical calls to cull the breed altogether.

[Linda K]

Wow, I'm speechless. That's the most apologetic post I've read yet in defence of this breed. It's never the dog, it's always the owner or the victim's fault or something else. Unbelievable!!!

Matthew B, should I be flattered that you think my post is the most apologetic one you have read? What a load of bosh, you were the one saying that all of what happened to you was entirely the breeds fault, I was merely pointing out (as have many others), that many facts in your story do not support that, but instead showed very poor ownership responsibility on behalf of owners. I am certainly not saying this is always the case in every dog attack.

And yes, before you jump on me, I have myself been snapped at and attacked by dogs, and had one of my sons having a dog jump on and try to attack him ( a tradey's dog, which was a lab x funnily enough), which had escaped from inside his ute, and had the owner abuse me for the fact his dog ran over and tried to attack us when we were walking through a park (which was not a dog park), but none of these incidents would make me want to have these breeds eradicated off the face of the earth, as you seem to want to, as I know that in all my cases, either the fault was mine or due to the owners lack of training, education or responsibility for their dogs actions creating the scenarios. If I considered they were due to the dog being that breed, then my list would read german shepherd, dachsund, maltese/schitzu x, heinz 57 (a real bitzer), staffy x, lab & lab x). Whilst I am sure that there can be instances where a mating can produce a dog (or other animal), that is suspect and no amount of training would prevent that, I would certainly never say this is always the case as you are, and that therefore that breed has no right to exist - that is overreactive and as has been demonstrated time and time again to you, it does not work.

[LizT]

It's never the dog, it's always the owner or the victim's fault or something else. Unbelievable!!!

No Matthew, the point is that pitbulls have been banned and eradicated in various jurisdictions over the last 20 years or more. As best as we can determine, not a single bite has been prevented using this strategy. What do you say to that?

The breed needs to be eradicated until it ceases to exist. Simple. It can't attack/kill you if it's extinct.

Then what do we do with every other breed or cross that attacks someone ? Continue to blame the breed or cross untill there are none left ?

No - Labradors, Beagles, etc aren't bred as fighting dogs. Is that such a hard concept for the people in this forum to grasp?

Beagles were bred to hunt in packs and run down small prey.

Not something they are permitted to do despite the fact that if trained to do so they would relish the opportunity.

A number of years ago a pack of domestic dogs attacked my uncles sheep. They were all local pets that had got together and "had some fun". A Labrador, JRT and a few assorted mixed breed SWF's. All loving family pets that got out at night and managed to kill a number of sheep! When the pound rounded them up the owners were in disbelief that their beloved Fidos had been involved.

Edited August 23, 2011 by LizT

[Aidan3]

Well if you believe (as the author of this piece seems to) that dogs go around fighting and biting to establish dominance at any opportunity they get, then a ban on any dog seems like a very good idea.

Aren't you fighting fire with fire here? Ie, looking for the part of the post with which you have a quarrel (exaggerating the alpha dog stuff) and ignoring the more substantive part (tough dog bred for big game, courageous, not recommended as a pet). Your moniker suggests that sympathetic rather than argumentative listening would be better.

The author started off talking about one sort of dog then generalised to all dogs. Having worked with a lot of types of dogs, it isn't true and perpetuates the myth that dogs are inherently violent and need to be kept subdued in order to be safe.

The reality is that dogs do everything they can to avoid a fight. We really have to push them over the edge to get that behaviour from them, intentionally or otherwise. If an undercurrent of thugs are still breeding game-bred dogs then we should be policing this activity, certainly.

My moniker is a figure of speech, I really don't think we need to argue about it.

[Matthew_B]

Well if you believe (as the author of this piece seems to) that dogs go around fighting and biting to establish dominance at any opportunity they get, then a ban on any dog seems like a very good idea.

Aren't you fighting fire with fire here? Ie, looking for the part of the post with which you have a quarrel (exaggerating the alpha dog stuff) and ignoring the more substantive part (tough dog bred for big game, courageous, not recommended as a pet). Your moniker suggests that sympathetic rather than argumentative listening would be better.

The author started off talking about one sort of dog then generalised to all dogs. Having worked with a lot of types of dogs, it isn't true and perpetuates the myth that dogs are inherently violent and need to be kept subdued in order to be safe.

The reality is that dogs do everything they can to avoid a fight. We really have to push them over the edge to get that behaviour from them, intentionally or otherwise. If an undercurrent of thugs are still breeding game-bred dogs then we should be policing this activity, certainly.

My moniker is a figure of speech, I really don't think we need to argue about it.

OMG, and you call me uneducated?!?!?!

[Matthew_B]

I can see Matthew's point to a degree. While all breeds can bite, some are bred for temperaments that are likely to become a hazard. Take the bull breeds out of the picture because many people have loving investments in t hem. Let's look at the temperament description for the Mountain Cur, a US landrace that, so far as I know, isn't found in Australia. I don't think this breed should be welcomed to suburban or urban environments. 'Cat' here is likely to mean mountain lion; a 'razor back' is a wild boar. Underlining and colour changes in original.

This is not a submissive, easygoing dog. With the toughness and courage to confront a very angry, very large cat, these curs have learned to be decisive and dauntless. Usually silent on the trail, they make consistent guard dogs but certainly are not ideal for suburbia, where there is no call to work. Trailing ability varies with strains, but they have enough nose to follow game and many carry treeing ability. Some lines are bred for tree dogs and others for baying. This very tough large game, raccoon, and squirrel hunter is willing to face a squealing razor back or an angry wild cat when it is cornered. They have a strong desire to please their master. Very protective of the property and family; and without an owner who is more dominant than themselves they can become over-protective. The Mountain Cur is noted for his courage. This hunting dog will catch a mad bull head- on in the nose and will hold his ground even against a bear when threatened. The objective in training this dog is to achieve a pack leader status. It is a natural instinct for a dog to have an order in their pack. When we humans live with dogs, we become their pack. The entire pack cooperates under a single leader. Lines are clearly defined and rules are set. Because a dog communicates his displeasure with growling and eventually biting, all other humans MUST be higher up in the order than the dog. The humans must be the ones making the decisions, not the dogs. That is the only way your relationship with your dog can be a complete success.

Finally - a sane voice of reason!

[poodlefan]

Finally - a sane voice of reason!

Huh?

The dog's described are not fighting dogs, have an inate desire to please and ARE NOT IN THIS COUNTRY.

The author makes the point that its humans that determine whether or not a relationship with a dog will be a success.

That's hardly in agreeance with your :kill all the fighting dogs: proposition Matthew.

[Aidan3]

The reality is that dogs do everything they can to avoid a fight.

OMG, and you call me uneducated?!?!?!

No, I didn't call you uneducated. You formed that opinion on your own, regardless of the facts.

As it happens, I work with aggressive dogs. I make them safe. In order to do that I have to know what causes dogs to fight or bite. I send them back often to homes with kids, and I would not do that in good conscience if I didn't know exactly what I was doing.

[Quickasyoucan]

Finally - a sane voice of reason!

Huh?

The dog's described are not fighting dogs, have an inate desire to please and ARE NOT IN THIS COUNTRY.

The author makes the point that its humans that determine whether or not a relationship with a dog will be a success.

That's hardly in agreeance with your :kill all the fighting dogs: proposition Matthew.

Besides seems a random dog to pick for an example, can't remember hearing any stats about fatalities from maulings by mountain curs. The US has all kinds of varieties like this that are not present in Australia .

Again if you want to harp on about the purpose that dogs were bred for as people have stated time and time again APBT's and staffordshire bull terriers in England for that matter were culled if they showed aggression towards HUMANS. They were not bred to be HUMAN aggressive that is why as sandgrubber states so many people have "loving investments in them".

ETA: not everyone who owns a bull breed is a redneck or an irresponsible dog owner, a lot of people choose to own them because they are great loving, tolerant, playful dogs not just as some bogan status symbol. Extra edit because I looked up Mountain Cur and they are a UKC breed.

Edited August 23, 2011 by Quickasyoucan

[BJean]

I can see Matthew's point to a degree. While all breeds can bite, some are bred for temperaments that are likely to become a hazard. Take the bull breeds out of the picture because many people have loving investments in t hem. Let's look at the temperament description for the Mountain Cur, a US landrace that, so far as I know, isn't found in Australia. I don't think this breed should be welcomed to suburban or urban environments. 'Cat' here is likely to mean mountain lion; a 'razor back' is a wild boar. Underlining and colour changes in original.

Before we add more misinformation, let's establish immediately that the The mtn cur breed is not a landrace.

[BJean]

Finally - a sane voice of reason!

Huh?

The dog's described are not fighting dogs, have an inate desire to please and ARE NOT IN THIS COUNTRY.

The author makes the point that its humans that determine whether or not a relationship with a dog will be a success.

That's hardly in agreeance with your :kill all the fighting dogs: proposition Matthew.

PF, with respect

I really dont know why you bother wasting your time with the alterego calling himself Mathew B.

let him or her or it think what they like.

They are inconsequential.

You can't saw sawdust.

Even you, PF

[poodlefan]

PF, with respect

I really dont know why you bother wasting your time with the alterego calling himself Mathew B.

let him or her or it think what they like.

They are inconsequential.

You can't saw sawdust.

Even you, PF

I agree. I even said as much.. but its hard to watch people making arguments that are illogical and claims that are unjustified.

I tell myself everytime this subject comes up to stay away.... but it suckers me every time.

[melzawelza]

Well if you believe (as the author of this piece seems to) that dogs go around fighting and biting to establish dominance at any opportunity they get, then a ban on any dog seems like a very good idea.

Aren't you fighting fire with fire here? Ie, looking for the part of the post with which you have a quarrel (exaggerating the alpha dog stuff) and ignoring the more substantive part (tough dog bred for big game, courageous, not recommended as a pet). Your moniker suggests that sympathetic rather than argumentative listening would be better.

The author started off talking about one sort of dog then generalised to all dogs. Having worked with a lot of types of dogs, it isn't true and perpetuates the myth that dogs are inherently violent and need to be kept subdued in order to be safe.

The reality is that dogs do everything they can to avoid a fight. We really have to push them over the edge to get that behaviour from them, intentionally or otherwise. If an undercurrent of thugs are still breeding game-bred dogs then we should be policing this activity, certainly.

My moniker is a figure of speech, I really don't think we need to argue about it.

OMG, and you call me uneducated?!?!?!

Aidan is a very well respected dog trainer and behaviourist, specializing in aggressive dogs. I think it's safe to say he knows a hell of a lot more about what motivates dogs to fight and/or be aggressive than you do Matthew.

[geo]

PF, with respect

I really dont know why you bother wasting your time with the alterego calling himself Mathew B.

let him or her or it think what they like.

They are inconsequential.

You can't saw sawdust.

Even you, PF

I agree. I even said as much.. but its hard to watch people making arguments that are illogical and claims that are unjustified.

I tell myself everytime this subject comes up to stay away.... but it suckers me every time.

Don't stop posting, lots of people read this and need your viewpoint instead of the unbalanced ramblings of mathewB

Edited August 23, 2011 by geo