Child Killed By Dog

[Angelina]

well they haven't called it a purebred Pitbull, they have called it a Pitbull mastiff ... that indicates cross doesn't it

[melzawelza]

No it doesn't. Average Joe had no idea about dog breeds and unless they hear the word cross would have no idea. This sort of thin has bad ramifications for pure pit bulls and pure bullmastiffs. Because people just hear this repeated over and over again until it sticks in their head.

[Matthew_B]

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

So what are you saying Matthew? That labs, beagles etc can't bite people? That only certain types of dogs have the potential to be aggressive? If a lab or beagle bit someone, what would your reaction be?

OMG! How many times do I have to say it? Yes, any dog can bite - I've said this numerous times. That isn't the point. The point is that pitbulls have been bred as fighting dogs. That makes them an inherently dangerous breed to have around. Labradors, Beagles, Golden Retrievers aren't now, nor have they ever been bred as fighting dogs. They are renowned as 'family' dogs. Honestly, I feel like I am talking to a brick wall sometimes...

What part of human aggression vs animal aggression dont you understand.They were bred to fight other dogs not gladiators at the colloseum.

The fact they were bred for fighting clearly means they have a predisposition to aggressive behaviour. Whether the focus of their aggression in the past was other dogs or humans is irrelevant. They are a naturally aggressive dog.

[Kavik]

You didn't answer my question about the guarding breeds - there are a lot of breeds that have been and are used for guarding/security/protection/police and others that have historically been used for dogfighting. APBT do not have the monopoly on being used for some activity that used aggression.

[~Anne~]

Anne

http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/49/Files/IS38_RoadDeathsB.pdf

I'm genuinely shocked at the number.

[jacqui835]

I believe that as a breed 'group', the terriers are more feisty on the whole and do have a stronger urge to kill. I have personally owned a terrier cross, and he killed many wild rabbits, rats, mice, birds etc and would try to attack dogs much larger than himself. Admittedly, I was the main trainer of this dog and when we got him I was 7, so he did not receive a whole lot of it. He would bite if provoked, but it was more of a bite and run/fear thing. Perhaps that was because he knew people could fight back - plenty of people in my family/friend group had no issues with giving him a boot up the backside and he was only 9kg.

I imagine that if he'd had 30+kg to work with, he would have been a dangerous dog.

I now own an entire male dobe cross rottie, 40+ kg and he seems to take his job of protecting me very seriously - see my other threads if you want examples. That said, if I had to worry about him killing a child should he somehow end up in their house, I would put him down today.

I don't think you should be allowed to keep a dog that will kill someone given the chance. Fact of the matter is, muzzling it, caging it - what sort of life is it living anyway? And living like that with no socialising is going to make the situation worse. And the risk imo is too high. It only takes one time of you leaving the gate open or whatever, and someone is dead. Gosh we didn't close our gate properly one day, and our dogs took themselves next door and were playing with the children. Now that's a terrible thing and we maybe should have been fined, but like I said, if I had any doubt in my mind about whether my dogs would hurt someone except under very particular circumstances (eg protecting me), I wouldn't keep them in a developed area (if at all).

I don't really care what breed your dog is. But if you know the only thing stopping your dog from killing or seriously hurting another human being is a muzzle/lead/cage, I just don't think there's a justifiable reason for keeping those dogs around.

[montall]

I've owned a dog aggressive dog in the past and I never saw any signs of aggression towards people. Actually he was super friendly with people, but I am talking about adults or older children, I was very very wary with him around small children. He would go on alert when small children were around, the same sort of alert I saw before he would try to launch an attack on another dog. I never gave him the chance to act on it so never knew for sure if he would attack a small child but I didn't trust him around them. I don't know whether I would have kept him if I had any young children (mine were grown) or grandchildren that were around regularly. Thankfully I never had to make that decision. I'm not sure what the problem was (if in fact there actually was a problem) maybe it was because they were on the same level as him so therefore eye to eye or something, thankfully once again I never had to address what may or may not have been a problem, but I would be hesitant to ever own a DA dog again, especially a relatively big powerful one, the risk is just too great. Incidentally he was a dalmatian.

[Bindo]

Anne

http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/49/Files/IS38_RoadDeathsB.pdf

I'm genuinely shocked at the number.

This is a bit off topic, but was there a particular reason the original reference to this paper was for a ten year period in the last century rather than the latest data? If you look a the last ten years, it's not anywhere near as dramatic - halved in fact. No doubt due to better preventative measures such as car, road and driver safety improvements. Multifaceted approach, similar to what is needed in the dog safety situation.

[lokelani]

Why

Everything those dogs did was sport, they are not a lap dog, they are a working dog, they were doing no harm to anyone except for enjoying some of their activities. Well respected supporters and advocates of the APBT partake In most of those sports

I see no harm In that, just because It's something you wouldn't do with most other breeds doesn't make It wrong and shouldn't be seen as damaging their reputation, It's what makes them what they are a very agile athletic dog

Pitbulls haven't "worked" legally for many years. They no longer perform their original function and much as I would never sanction nor condone dog fighting, frankly I think its part of the problem because the human aggression that would have been ruthlessly culled in the breed is now encouraged by a small proportion of fanciers (and that's the start of the problem)

Then we have the type of folk attracted to the breed for the wrong reasons. The tough macho types who give their dogs tough names and drape them in studs and leather and apppear to enjoy them intimidating others.

Its one thing to admire the breed for its courage and tenancity and another entirely to encourage manifestations of anti-social behaviour in the dogs.

Sadly, BSL has shut down opportunities for these dogs to attend training in most states but we hardly ever see them at our dog club where they'd have the opportunity to be good ambassadors for the breed.

The "circle the wagons and stuff everyone else" paradigm adopted by the breeds defenders in the anti-BSL fight didn't help either.

But none of this means that the dogs are inherently dangerous.. lets not lose sight of that. Half the time the dog they use as the testing dog in temperament tests on shows like Animal Cops is a pitbull... a happy, tail waggy friendly dog.

Well, Bosco and have gone back to training down at CDC, so if you are ever down there on a Sunday morning and see the brown doggy in my sig, come and say hi

[Matthew_B]

You didn't answer my question about the guarding breeds - there are a lot of breeds that have been and are used for guarding/security/protection/police and others that have historically been used for dogfighting. APBT do not have the monopoly on being used for some activity that used aggression.

I have never seen a fighting dog used in a role with Police or security guards. They aren't as controllable/trainable as dogs such as the German Shepherd. My brother was in the Army in QLD and good mates with an MP on the dog squad of the Army base guards. He said the level of self-control those dogs have is amazing. He saw a training scenario one day - in a bite suit one of the MP's ran from a dog that was sent to detain him. Just before the dog reached the guard in the bite suit, the dogs' handler issued an order to stop the chase and to return to his side. It did so immediately, without hesitation. Bet a pitbull wouldn't have that kind of restraint. Why do you think they aren't used in this role?

[MonElite]

MattB you are wrong re police and army. The reason these dogs are not used is that they are to friendly towards people. When trained they tend to focus way to much on the equipment rather then a person. The rather bite the sleeve then an arm. Plus most are not big enough

[Janba]

You didn't answer my question about the guarding breeds - there are a lot of breeds that have been and are used for guarding/security/protection/police and others that have historically been used for dogfighting. APBT do not have the monopoly on being used for some activity that used aggression.

I have never seen a fighting dog used in a role with Police or security guards. They aren't as controllable/trainable as dogs such as the German Shepherd. My brother was in the Army in QLD and good mates with an MP on the dog squad of the Army base guards. He said the level of self-control those dogs have is amazing. He saw a training scenario one day - in a bite suit one of the MP's ran from a dog that was sent to detain him. Just before the dog reached the guard in the bite suit, the dogs' handler issued an order to stop the chase and to return to his side. It did so immediately, without hesitation. Bet a pitbull wouldn't have that kind of restraint. Why do you think they aren't used in this role?

That recall of the attack is the result of training not something that the dog is born with. I think you would be hard pressed to call any hunting, herding, gundog etc dogs off without training.

[Matthew_B]

MattB you are wrong re police and army. The reason these dogs are not used is that they are to friendly towards people. When trained they tend to focus way to much on the equipment rather then a person. The rather bite the sleeve then an arm. Plus most are not big enough

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Kavik]

MonElite is correct Matthew.

[poodlefan]

I have never seen a fighting dog used in a role with Police or security guards. They aren't as controllable/trainable as dogs such as the German Shepherd. My brother was in the Army in QLD and good mates with an MP on the dog squad of the Army base guards. He said the level of self-control those dogs have is amazing. He saw a training scenario one day - in a bite suit one of the MP's ran from a dog that was sent to detain him. Just before the dog reached the guard in the bite suit, the dogs' handler issued an order to stop the chase and to return to his side. It did so immediately, without hesitation. Bet a pitbull wouldn't have that kind of restraint. Why do you think they aren't used in this role?

Because they don't bite as hard or as reliably as other breeds. They're also really shite at jumping six foot fences after crims..and they want to lick them when they find them.

I can tell you some fascinating stories about police dogs doing the wrong thing.. but it doesn't prove anything about GSDs or APBTs.

[Aidan3]

ETA: not worth it

Edited August 24, 2011 by Aidan2

[geo]

You didn't answer my question about the guarding breeds - there are a lot of breeds that have been and are used for guarding/security/protection/police and others that have historically been used for dogfighting. APBT do not have the monopoly on being used for some activity that used aggression.

I have never seen a fighting dog used in a role with Police or security guards. They aren't as controllable/trainable as dogs such as the German Shepherd. My brother was in the Army in QLD and good mates with an MP on the dog squad of the Army base guards. He said the level of self-control those dogs have is amazing. He saw a training scenario one day - in a bite suit one of the MP's ran from a dog that was sent to detain him. Just before the dog reached the guard in the bite suit, the dogs' handler issued an order to stop the chase and to return to his side. It did so immediately, without hesitation. Bet a pitbull wouldn't have that kind of restraint. Why do you think they aren't used in this role?

APBT are used as search and rescue dogs, police dogs, and if you can be bothered watching the video they can be used as protection dogs, they can also be used to herd cattle and as therapy dogs but many people have already written this but you do not learn.

YOU HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT DOGS< PLEASE DON"T EVER CHOSE TO OWN ONE!!

[Zhou Xuanyao]

Very impressive !

eta - Re Aidan's former post

Edited August 24, 2011 by Lo Pan

[melzawelza]

Damn, I wanted to watch that! Why take away Aidan?

[Aidan3]

It was a video of a pitbull performing a FRII routine, complete with the displays of control in bitework that Matthew seems to think only GSDs are capable of.

However, given the context, I thought it would be misunderstood.