>Even then, if they failed to raise it right, failed to teach it, it would have destructive issues, but it would see the children as members of the pack and not as threats.<
Au contraire. An adult dog, especially an adult male dog, would very well see the weaker children as pack members all right. They would see the children as subordinate pack members to be disciplined according to canine cultural norms. Dogs discipline with their teeth and a bite that might not hurt another dog can very well scar a child permanently. In addition, get the wrong dog even as a pup, and you could have an adult dog that sees itself as alpha. At that point an unwitting adult who challenges the animal could very well find him or herself in a world of trouble.
Remember, your entire premise rests on a novice or uneducated dog owner. It takes a certain amount of common sense and dog savvy to raise a dog as a subordinate family member. Obviously, you and your family have done well raising dogs. The clueless among us will not be so fortunate.
Again, in the principle, we agree, but in the context of this article, and in the context that we are COMPARATIVE between, and unknown, untrained and one raised poorly but naively, the risk is lessor for the later and greater for the former. Now, in your most extreme example, assuming the worst possible conditions for the puppy raised, and then simply and Unknown for the adult, sure, the median will favor the unknown adult.
But that is biasing the trial in advance and does not prove anything but that you are good at knowing how to set the standards to produce the outcome of the statistics.
It is not a FAIR sample.
I would therefore submit, that in a truly RANDOM sample, you will have a greater number of adult dogs, given up for good reason, ie, bad behaviors, than you will puppy raised.
Why? Because as we have already discussed, the bad adult dogs HAD to have COME FROM badly raised puppies.
Ergo: The puppy pool of good vs badly raised, greatly favors the owners who KEEP their dogs, as if they did have bad issues, THOSE would be the ones given away.
Your scenario only works in the extremes of the bell curve. The norm, just systematically, reflects that the very reason more adults are given up is due to behavior issues. Thus greater risk.
Now. To my VERY VERY first point: And where we have greatly differed. Most of the usual suspects on this thread, either deny ANY RISK or have AVOIDED discussing the risk. No one, other than the few early on who have been driven off this thread, supported my position, that where children are involved, ANY RISK is too much risk.
Which is why I said NEVER. I am speaking to, these unskilled random folks, we have both been using in our examples.
Which is why I dismissed any and every expert trainer’s personal stories. THEY are the exceptions, not the norm.
For the normal folks, they are better off starting from scratch than, taking, any risk. No matter how slight or diverse are the odds.