Dame Aussie Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 (edited) I didn't ask the question to revisit the big dog vs small dog debate; all dogs can be aggressive. However, reality is that if big dogs attack then people and dogs can end up very badly injured or dead. As an owner of large dogs for over 15 years and now with a mini poodle added to the mix my greatest fear has always been large loose dogs when I am out walking with mine - small ones I apply the boot to or growl at and they generally run away. My walks are more complicated now as I pick my mini up if we are charged or encounter large loose dogs - not an option with my big guys - the largest weighs 30kg. I am much more afraid of off leash large dogs than small ones. Idiot owners of large dogs seen to be different to idiot owners of small dogs too - yes I am applying a stereotype - it is called "profiling" I just hope they develop a dna test for "idiot dog owner" Where is the evidence for this? Edited November 7, 2012 by Aussie3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayla1 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 oh please, let's not turn this into a big dog vs small dog debate. All dog owners need to be responsible. Big dogs can cause more harm than little dogs (you can kick a little dog more easily). These are simple facts and yet people seem to harp on about them... Maybe because a lot of little dog owners, don't control their dogs because they are little. The problem is, if a little dog attacks, or harrasses a big dog & the big dog retaliates, it's always the big dog that gets blamed. The bolded part of your post, proves my point, just because they can't cause as much damage, doesn't mean they shouldn't be under control & not allowed to attack, growl at bigger dogs. Why is it always up to the big dog owner only, who should control their dogs. I don't think anyone has said that small dogs need not be under control (of course all dogs should be under control), rather that larger dogs obviously have the potential to do more damage and hence why people may be more wary of larger dogs off lead and not under control. Poor woman, and a devastating outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frufru Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 (edited) agree Edited November 7, 2012 by frufru Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke GSP Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 oh please, let's not turn this into a big dog vs small dog debate. All dog owners need to be responsible. Big dogs can cause more harm than little dogs (you can kick a little dog more easily). These are simple facts and yet people seem to harp on about them... My comment was in response to Luke GSP saying.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Which I think is an irresponsible and very short-sighted way of looking at the issue (because the issue isn't big dogs attacking, it's dogs attacking). And Luke.. couching your argument in the "but this is what the public thinks" defense doesn't really cut it when you yourself said.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Small dogs kill and injury both people and other dogs. To believe otherwise is being willfully ignorant. Show me one study that shows that small dogs represent the same % of dog attack related deaths as they represent of dog ownership! If you can't then I would say that your statement is the only thing here that is willfully ignorant. The reason I say about all large breed dog owners is that the further you pull away from breed the more chance you have of the legislation being written around a different criteria, now what do the majority of dogs that are involved in attacks causing death have in common? my guess would be that it isn't that they are small, white and fluffy and weighing less than 4KG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Poor lady and poor little dog. I'm not going to bother to address the statements about small dogs representing such a major threat, I'm happy that I've read and digested the DLG's dog attack statistics in 2010/2011 with descriptions of the breeds and cross breeds that have been identified. Of course, they may not have caught/identified all the vicious Maltese types, hell bent on attacking anyone and their dogs who venture out but I won't be walking the streets in terror of a loose little dog tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zug Zug Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Poor woman - she is clearly devastated. I can't imagine watching that happen to a dog I'd shared my life with for 14 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 oh please, let's not turn this into a big dog vs small dog debate. All dog owners need to be responsible. Big dogs can cause more harm than little dogs (you can kick a little dog more easily). These are simple facts and yet people seem to harp on about them... My comment was in response to Luke GSP saying.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Which I think is an irresponsible and very short-sighted way of looking at the issue (because the issue isn't big dogs attacking, it's dogs attacking). And Luke.. couching your argument in the "but this is what the public thinks" defense doesn't really cut it when you yourself said.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Small dogs kill and injury both people and other dogs. To believe otherwise is being willfully ignorant. Show me one study that shows that small dogs represent the same % of dog attack related deaths as they represent of dog ownership! If you can't then I would say that your statement is the only thing here that is willfully ignorant. The reason I say about all large breed dog owners is that the further you pull away from breed the more chance you have of the legislation being written around a different criteria, now what do the majority of dogs that are involved in attacks causing death have in common? my guess would be that it isn't that they are small, white and fluffy and weighing less than 4KG. Show me a study that proves your point and then we'll talk. Bearing in mind, of course, bites and other injuries caused by small dogs are much less likely to be reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 oh please, let's not turn this into a big dog vs small dog debate. All dog owners need to be responsible. Big dogs can cause more harm than little dogs (you can kick a little dog more easily). These are simple facts and yet people seem to harp on about them... My comment was in response to Luke GSP saying.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Which I think is an irresponsible and very short-sighted way of looking at the issue (because the issue isn't big dogs attacking, it's dogs attacking). And Luke.. couching your argument in the "but this is what the public thinks" defense doesn't really cut it when you yourself said.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Small dogs kill and injury both people and other dogs. To believe otherwise is being willfully ignorant. Show me one study that shows that small dogs represent the same % of dog attack related deaths as they represent of dog ownership! If you can't then I would say that your statement is the only thing here that is willfully ignorant. The reason I say about all large breed dog owners is that the further you pull away from breed the more chance you have of the legislation being written around a different criteria, now what do the majority of dogs that are involved in attacks causing death have in common? my guess would be that it isn't that they are small, white and fluffy and weighing less than 4KG. Show me a study that proves your point and then we'll talk. Bearing in mind, of course, bites and other injuries caused by small dogs are much less likely to be reported. And where's the study that what you are saying is factual? Everyone who writes a sentence has to have a study behind it? Honestly this is getting ridiculous. Have a look at the NSW DLG dog attack statistics - I Googled it - I doubt that it is much different in other states. It does make interesting reading. A lady has had her dog ripped apart by a Rottweiler. Let's hope the dog and it's owner are found and dealt with by the law before someone else and another innocent dog get injured/killed. It is completely unacceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Next we'll have the usual band of idiots that love to come on and suggest the small dog started it. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Noone is saying it's acceptable!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 After the big dogs get banned, the little dog people will want to ban middle sized dogs and then they'll look at their own little sizes and decide that even some of those are too big. Soon it'll be nothing but chihuahuas available ... #sarcasmbutprobablynotfarofftruegiventhisthread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 After the big dogs get banned, the little dog people will want to ban middle sized dogs and then they'll look at their own little sizes and decide that even some of those are too big. Soon it'll be nothing but chihuahuas available ... #sarcasmbutprobablynotfarofftruegiventhisthread :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 After the big dogs get banned, the little dog people will want to ban middle sized dogs and then they'll look at their own little sizes and decide that even some of those are too big. Soon it'll be nothing but chihuahuas available ... #sarcasmbutprobablynotfarofftruegiventhisthread Sorry Sheridan, but where's the survey that backs up your opinion of small dog owners? I'm a small dog owner currently. I've also owned a German Shepherd Cross, a Cattle cross and rescued or facilitated the rescue of dogs over 30 kilos on a regular basis. Some small dog owners have them for reasons other than that is all they want. Many people I know are so fearful about being attacked by large dogs, they tell me they want a dog they can pick up .... some people have bad backs. some peple have small spaces ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Why is it ok to question large dog owners but not small dog owners? We have been accosted by 3 dogs since we moved house, A Chi, a Pom and a SWF. Do I go around saying small dog owners need to watch themselves/that they're bigger idiots than large dog owners? No. because I know that ANY dog owner can be an idiot, size of the dog has nothing to do with it. At the beach yesterday we met a Malamute, a Kelpie and a SWF. Guess which one carried on like a banshee and hassled us the most? But again, I don't judge EVERY small dog owner by the actions of a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Andrea Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 (edited) My heart goes out to that poor lady. Having your dog mauled before your eyes is not something anyone will ever forget or recover from in a hurry. As for the current direction of the thread....really again?..........I have large dogs. Yes they have potential to cause more damage if they were to attack another dog but so what. That's like saying if I own a V8 I'm more likely to cause an accident than if I own a mini. If I'm a safe driver, am capable of handling a higher powered car and follow the road rules I could as just as easily be knocked in front of a bus by a morris while driving my V8. Good owners who socialise, exercise, train and contain their pets don't cause dog fights. Idiots own dogs of all sizes. Edited November 7, 2012 by Just Andrea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-sass Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Kind of blows the BSL supporters theory that only Pibull attacks are published, this one now a Rottweiler probably another BYB Rotty X bred by an idiot and sold to an idiot?. I have a problem with the concept of breed what you like and sell to who you like and the common factor in all of these horrific attacks is BYB's owned by irresponsible people. Lets see one of these idiots who's last dog was euthanised by irresponsible handling get passed the ownership requirements of a good breeder of papered dogs, these idiots for one would be lucky to afford the price of a papered pure breed or be willing to pay 1K+ for a good dog and secondly, most wouldn't qualify the breeder's requirements to supply them with a dog.........I have the dream of making it difficult for idiots to buy dogs.......at present, you get another one from another BYB and start the whole irresponsible ownership cycle all over again. Maybe people need to hold a licence to own a dog could be more effective than the dog holding the licence. More so than breed/size issues to reduce attacks, targeting and tightening up on people breeding crap dogs and the idiots who buy them with legislative measures is a better alternative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I can't comment on whether all the attacking dogs are back yard bred but I doubt it. As for people getting past registered breeders, can I just give you an example of two puppies recently sold (at over $2000 a piece) into the following two homes: 1st Home: studio apartment in city centre. Owners - full time workers who went out most evenings after work. 2nd Home: couple in mid 70s or older. Someone had to go into hospital so puppy was left behind with noone to care for it and became unhappy so started digging out. Also appears to have been abused. These two dogs ended up in rescue. I often wonder about the other homes this particular breeder has sold to. I'll counter that with a byb who gave away a puppy (same breed as above) to a friend who didn't like the dog at all because it wanted to be with him. Kept it for a year before surrendering. There's people with poor judgement everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Of course, they may not have caught/identified all the vicious Maltese types, hell bent on attacking anyone and their dogs who venture out but I won't be walking the streets in terror of a loose little dog tomorrow. you would be if they forced you or your dog out onto the road in front of a car. Made you drop your dogs lead in the scuffle and your dog took off never to be seen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke GSP Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 oh please, let's not turn this into a big dog vs small dog debate. All dog owners need to be responsible. Big dogs can cause more harm than little dogs (you can kick a little dog more easily). These are simple facts and yet people seem to harp on about them... My comment was in response to Luke GSP saying.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Which I think is an irresponsible and very short-sighted way of looking at the issue (because the issue isn't big dogs attacking, it's dogs attacking). And Luke.. couching your argument in the "but this is what the public thinks" defense doesn't really cut it when you yourself said.. and every owner of a large breed dog needs to start thinking about why these kinds of incidents keep happening Small dogs kill and injury both people and other dogs. To believe otherwise is being willfully ignorant. Show me one study that shows that small dogs represent the same % of dog attack related deaths as they represent of dog ownership! If you can't then I would say that your statement is the only thing here that is willfully ignorant. The reason I say about all large breed dog owners is that the further you pull away from breed the more chance you have of the legislation being written around a different criteria, now what do the majority of dogs that are involved in attacks causing death have in common? my guess would be that it isn't that they are small, white and fluffy and weighing less than 4KG. Show me a study that proves your point and then we'll talk. Bearing in mind, of course, bites and other injuries caused by small dogs are much less likely to be reported. dear oh dear, have a read of any of the reports or studies that cover death by dog attack, I can guarantee that you will not find one of them that shows that smaller breeds are represented at the same % as they are owned. Why do you think that might be? according to you they are just as capable and we all know that all dogs have the same propensity to bite. As for your comment about being "much less likely to be reported", are you honestly suggesting that whenever a maltese mauls a human or other dog to death there is some sort of cover up? or do you think that there is a reason why they are not reported? Could it possibly be because the damage that they do is not as severe (which would mean that you are agreeing with me) which in turn would mean that they do not represent the same level of danger to the public as a large powerful dog. let me give you an example, Nerf guns have the exact same ability to be fired at someone as a hand gun (propensity is the same, much like dogs) They both fire projectiles which can injure people (all dogs bite, so again very much the same) They both operate in the same manner (you pull the trigger, all breeds of dog would/could bite for the same reasons) Yet one of them is illegal in some states and you have to go through a rigorous licensing application to get one even in the states where they are not illegal. why do you think that is?.................Oh thats right, even though legally held firearms represented less than .01% of firearms injuries and deaths it is widely accepted that they are more dangerous than Nerf guns and hence need to be controlled, why is that view taken BECAUSE THEY CAN AND HAVE KILLED PEOPLE at a much higher rate of frequency than NERF guns. or maybe the same government agency that is covering up all the small dog attack maulings and deaths by forcing the media to report them as a large or powerful breed are also secretly covering up the NERF deaths as well? YEAH RIGHT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-sass Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 'dogmad' timestamp='1352280257' post='6012772'I can't comment on whether all the attacking dogs are back yard bred but I doubt it. I didn't say all the attacking dogs are BYB's, but most are by a considerable margin it appears. 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