Robbi Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I can label these dogs monsters and I have done so. As far as I'm concerned they are monsters of their breed whether human created or genetically predisposed. Yes the human created them and it is their fault but they are monsters regardless because of what they have done. If I can call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies" then I can call crappy dogs "monsters". Your continued name calling of the dogs involved in this attack is insulting and not justified. You cant know what the circumstances were that triggered these dogs to attack. Take a moment to consider whether these dogs are as much victims in the whole disaster as the young lad and his dog. You do not know whether these dogs were teased and abused or whether they have been encouraged to be dog aggressive. Name calling achieves nothing and certainly doesn't help the people and dogs involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixeduppup Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 ''shouldn't own a dog like that'' I've heard that before.Out walking my Bully x when a man with a big black dog comes around the corner.His dog starts barking and lungeing and nearly pulls the guy over.I take my dog onto the grass and turn her away from the dog .Man stands there with dog still barking untill my dog gets fed up and wants to bark back i hold her and keep her away.The man makes no attempt to correct his still lungeing dog.Instead he abuses me for ''having a dog like that''. It's because our dogs are "monsters" apparently & all other dogs are innocent "angels". I like how you're taking what I said out of context, I didn't say anything about breeds and monsters, I said that these two particular dogs were monsters due to what they did which is a direct result of what their breeders/owner didn't do. I love bull breeds. If it were a lab or a kelpie I would be saying the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixeduppup Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I can label these dogs monsters and I have done so. As far as I'm concerned they are monsters of their breed whether human created or genetically predisposed. Yes the human created them and it is their fault but they are monsters regardless because of what they have done. If I can call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies" then I can call crappy dogs "monsters". Your continued name calling of the dogs involved in this attack is insulting and not justified. You cant know what the circumstances were that triggered these dogs to attack. Take a moment to consider whether these dogs are as much victims in the whole disaster as the young lad and his dog. You do not know whether these dogs were teased and abused or whether they have been encouraged to be dog aggressive. Name calling achieves nothing and certainly doesn't help the people and dogs involved I can call them what I like as this is how I see them. Just like I call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies". this is my opinion and my view and they became monsters because of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizT Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 How's this for a scenario. Legs injured by dogs biting boy while he held the dog and then once he was on the ground, the ear was bitten in a similar manner. All you have to be is between a dog and it's intended target. <b><br style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: verdana, tahoma, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 17.600000381469727px; background-color: rgb(238, 242, 247); "></b><br style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: verdana, tahoma, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 17.600000381469727px; background-color: rgb(238, 242, 247); ">I'm not ruling out HA or transferred aggression but the fact is we simply don't know what the dogs' motivation was and frankly I don't really think it matters all that much. Fact is you cannot label these dogs as monsters and it's actually not very helpful at all. The moment you do it, you can differentiate these dogs from your average suburban dogs - and that's not a good move at all. *looks at scars on hand and arm from being careless and getting in the way of a fight , with two dogs who went on to be guide dogs.* Exactly. Dogs being dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mantis Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 ''shouldn't own a dog like that'' I've heard that before.Out walking my Bully x when a man with a big black dog comes around the corner.His dog starts barking and lungeing and nearly pulls the guy over.I take my dog onto the grass and turn her away from the dog .Man stands there with dog still barking untill my dog gets fed up and wants to bark back i hold her and keep her away.The man makes no attempt to correct his still lungeing dog.Instead he abuses me for ''having a dog like that''. It's because our dogs are "monsters" apparently & all other dogs are innocent "angels". I like how you're taking what I said out of context, I didn't say anything about breeds and monsters, I said that these two particular dogs were monsters due to what they did which is a direct result of what their breeders/owner didn't do. I love bull breeds. If it were a lab or a kelpie I would be saying the same thing. Yes & I can say I don't believe you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixeduppup Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) ''shouldn't own a dog like that'' I've heard that before.Out walking my Bully x when a man with a big black dog comes around the corner.His dog starts barking and lungeing and nearly pulls the guy over.I take my dog onto the grass and turn her away from the dog .Man stands there with dog still barking untill my dog gets fed up and wants to bark back i hold her and keep her away.The man makes no attempt to correct his still lungeing dog.Instead he abuses me for ''having a dog like that''. It's because our dogs are "monsters" apparently & all other dogs are innocent "angels". I like how you're taking what I said out of context, I didn't say anything about breeds and monsters, I said that these two particular dogs were monsters due to what they did which is a direct result of what their breeders/owner didn't do. I love bull breeds. If it were a lab or a kelpie I would be saying the same thing. Yes & I can say I don't believe you. Actually when the husky that killed that baby a few years ago was a monster. As was the dog that killed that young girl in Vic (forget the breed), the point is any dog that brutally attacks a humanbeing is a monster. Maybe monster isn't a PC term but I guess it means something different to every individual. To me monster means something that is dangerous and unsafe to be around. Edited October 31, 2012 by mixeduppup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbi Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I can label these dogs monsters and I have done so. As far as I'm concerned they are monsters of their breed whether human created or genetically predisposed. Yes the human created them and it is their fault but they are monsters regardless because of what they have done. If I can call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies" then I can call crappy dogs "monsters". Your continued name calling of the dogs involved in this attack is insulting and not justified. You cant know what the circumstances were that triggered these dogs to attack. Take a moment to consider whether these dogs are as much victims in the whole disaster as the young lad and his dog. You do not know whether these dogs were teased and abused or whether they have been encouraged to be dog aggressive. Name calling achieves nothing and certainly doesn't help the people and dogs involved I can call them what I like as this is how I see them. Just like I call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies". this is my opinion and my view and they became monsters because of people. I have had people call my Bull Breed x all sorts of rude names when out in public due to her looks, dogs aren't monsters, people can be however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixeduppup Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I can label these dogs monsters and I have done so. As far as I'm concerned they are monsters of their breed whether human created or genetically predisposed. Yes the human created them and it is their fault but they are monsters regardless because of what they have done. If I can call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies" then I can call crappy dogs "monsters". Your continued name calling of the dogs involved in this attack is insulting and not justified. You cant know what the circumstances were that triggered these dogs to attack. Take a moment to consider whether these dogs are as much victims in the whole disaster as the young lad and his dog. You do not know whether these dogs were teased and abused or whether they have been encouraged to be dog aggressive. Name calling achieves nothing and certainly doesn't help the people and dogs involved I can call them what I like as this is how I see them. Just like I call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies". this is my opinion and my view and they became monsters because of people. I have had people call my Bull Breed x all sorts of rude names when out in public due to her looks, dogs aren't monsters, people can be however. I love Bull breeds and have worked with them in the past, Amstaffs are one of my three favourite breeds. I think people are seeing me saying monster as something much more drenched in malice than it is. My family has always used the term "monster" to describe anything that we see as dangerous or unsafe. "That's a monster of a tree" or "That bridge is a monster" etc is commonly heard in my family. It's a descriptive word I use is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixeduppup Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 His dog is ALIVE! nice little staffyX /pitty type as well. So glad to see he's doing ok and his dog is ok! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) I love Bull breeds and have worked with them in the past, Amstaffs are one of my three favourite breeds. I think people are seeing me saying monster as something much more drenched in malice than it is. My family has always used the term "monster" to describe anything that we see as dangerous or unsafe. "That's a monster of a tree" or "That bridge is a monster" etc is commonly heard in my family. It's a descriptive word I use is all. It might pay to remember that you're not having this conversation with your family. Most would consider your use of the term in this context as describing a creature that inspires horror or disgust and not a marvel of nature or something of unusually large size. Edited October 31, 2012 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Even very well trained and supposedly well bred dogs get involved in dog fights. It is sometimes just what dogs do, no matter how well trained they are. I've seen a few cases of service dogs (customs, police and guide dog labradors- a breed which people generally seem to think have lower incidences of DA) getting into fights and their handlers being bitten trying to separate them. However, being bitten multiple times and having an ear ripped off, is not simply getting in between 2 fighting dogs. Could happen all too easily if you were knocked to the ground and sheltered the dog under attack with your body. It's like getting between a tree and a chain saw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilli_star Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 In case anyone missed the news linky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 In case anyone missed the news linky Thanks! So here's how he was bitten. He tried to rescue his dog Costa when one of them grabbed him on the leg.“As I bent down, grabbed my leg a bit, that's when one of them got me in the ear." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixeduppup Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I love Bull breeds and have worked with them in the past, Amstaffs are one of my three favourite breeds. I think people are seeing me saying monster as something much more drenched in malice than it is. My family has always used the term "monster" to describe anything that we see as dangerous or unsafe. "That's a monster of a tree" or "That bridge is a monster" etc is commonly heard in my family. It's a descriptive word I use is all. It might pay to remember that you're not having this conversation with your family. Most would consider your use of the term in this context as describing a creature that inspires horror or disgust and not a marvel of nature or something of unusually large size. No we use it to describe something that is dangerous or unsafe. So in this context it's fine. thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke GSP Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I can label these dogs monsters and I have done so. As far as I'm concerned they are monsters of their breed whether human created or genetically predisposed. Yes the human created them and it is their fault but they are monsters regardless because of what they have done. If I can call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies" then I can call crappy dogs "monsters". Your continued name calling of the dogs involved in this attack is insulting and not justified. You cant know what the circumstances were that triggered these dogs to attack. Take a moment to consider whether these dogs are as much victims in the whole disaster as the young lad and his dog. You do not know whether these dogs were teased and abused or whether they have been encouraged to be dog aggressive. Name calling achieves nothing and certainly doesn't help the people and dogs involved I can call them what I like as this is how I see them. Just like I call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies". this is my opinion and my view and they became monsters because of people. I have had people call my Bull Breed x all sorts of rude names when out in public due to her looks, dogs aren't monsters, people can be however. I love Bull breeds and have worked with them in the past, Amstaffs are one of my three favourite breeds. I think people are seeing me saying monster as something much more drenched in malice than it is. My family has always used the term "monster" to describe anything that we see as dangerous or unsafe. "That's a monster of a tree" or "That bridge is a monster" etc is commonly heard in my family. It's a descriptive word I use is all. for goodness sake, children, children, children how about we all grow up and get past who called the dogs what. Fact: they were big powerful animals Fact: they escaped and attacked of their own accord Fact: there are breeds that are DA but sadly some label it as "gameness" and see it as a minor issue that can be "managed" Well guess what, nuclear war heads, pedophiles, murderers, rapists and loaded guns can all be "managed" as well but I still wouldn't want them in my neighbours back yard, most of the conditions aforementioned can be explained by science and psychology but in a lot of peoples minds people that carry out these despicable acts would be classed as "monsters" and a lot worse than that. Who cares what people want to call these dogs, they have caused immense harm to a human and should be dealt with accordingly as should their owner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mixeduppup Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I can label these dogs monsters and I have done so. As far as I'm concerned they are monsters of their breed whether human created or genetically predisposed. Yes the human created them and it is their fault but they are monsters regardless because of what they have done. If I can call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies" then I can call crappy dogs "monsters". Your continued name calling of the dogs involved in this attack is insulting and not justified. You cant know what the circumstances were that triggered these dogs to attack. Take a moment to consider whether these dogs are as much victims in the whole disaster as the young lad and his dog. You do not know whether these dogs were teased and abused or whether they have been encouraged to be dog aggressive. Name calling achieves nothing and certainly doesn't help the people and dogs involved I can call them what I like as this is how I see them. Just like I call nice dogs "cuddle bunnies". this is my opinion and my view and they became monsters because of people. I have had people call my Bull Breed x all sorts of rude names when out in public due to her looks, dogs aren't monsters, people can be however. I love Bull breeds and have worked with them in the past, Amstaffs are one of my three favourite breeds. I think people are seeing me saying monster as something much more drenched in malice than it is. My family has always used the term "monster" to describe anything that we see as dangerous or unsafe. "That's a monster of a tree" or "That bridge is a monster" etc is commonly heard in my family. It's a descriptive word I use is all. for goodness sake, children, children, children how about we all grow up and get past who called the dogs what. Fact: they were big powerful animals Fact: they escaped and attacked of their own accord Fact: there are breeds that are DA but sadly some label it as "gameness" and see it as a minor issue that can be "managed" Well guess what, nuclear war heads, pedophiles, murderers, rapists and loaded guns can all be "managed" as well but I still wouldn't want them in my neighbours back yard, most of the conditions aforementioned can be explained by science and psychology but in a lot of peoples minds people that carry out these despicable acts would be classed as "monsters" and a lot worse than that. Who cares what people want to call these dogs, they have caused immense harm to a human and should be dealt with accordingly as should their owner! Exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tralee Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) I don't use the words 'vicious' and dog in the same sentence unless absolutely justified. And even then, I use the term guardedly. The electricity company won't read my meters because they say there are vicious dogs. They always get sternly corrected. Monster fits in this instance in the sense of a number of definitions but mostly because the dogs have frightened people, have behaved wickedly and shown extreme cruelty. I don't think 'bad dog' has the same chutzpa. Edited October 31, 2012 by Tralee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabbath Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 DA is not gameness. Just to add fuel to the fire. Terrible incident, I feel for the guy that was bitten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 for goodness sake, children, children, children how about we all grow up and get past who called the dogs what. Fact: they were big powerful animals Fact: they escaped and attacked of their own accord Fact: there are breeds that are DA but sadly some label it as "gameness" and see it as a minor issue that can be "managed" Well guess what, nuclear war heads, pedophiles, murderers, rapists and loaded guns can all be "managed" as well but I still wouldn't want them in my neighbours back yard, most of the conditions aforementioned can be explained by science and psychology but in a lot of peoples minds people that carry out these despicable acts would be classed as "monsters" and a lot worse than that. Who cares what people want to call these dogs, they have caused immense harm to a human and should be dealt with accordingly as should their owner! I care. Labelling these dogs as "monsters" suggests that somehow they are extraordinary. Until I hear evidence to the contrary, I'll consider them highly dog aggressive dogs. No more, no less. Hyperbolic language is what I expect of the press, not people discussing these incidents on a dog forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 for goodness sake, children, children, children how about we all grow up and get past who called the dogs what. Fact: they were big powerful animals Fact: they escaped and attacked of their own accord Fact: there are breeds that are DA but sadly some label it as "gameness" and see it as a minor issue that can be "managed" Well guess what, nuclear war heads, pedophiles, murderers, rapists and loaded guns can all be "managed" as well but I still wouldn't want them in my neighbours back yard, most of the conditions aforementioned can be explained by science and psychology but in a lot of peoples minds people that carry out these despicable acts would be classed as "monsters" and a lot worse than that. Who cares what people want to call these dogs, they have caused immense harm to a human and should be dealt with accordingly as should their owner! I care. Labelling these dogs as "monsters" suggests that somehow they are extraordinary. Until I hear evidence to the contrary, I'll consider them highly dog aggressive dogs. No more, no less. Hyperbolic language is what I expect of the press, not people discussing these incidents on a dog forum. I agree. We don't need any more hysteria, there's enough already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now