Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: uncommonsense
Pretty close to the axiom of guns don't kill people, people kill. Dogs are dogs. There are a few breeds that are more likely to attack their owners and many would be surprised with which breeds are most responsible.

No, that's not really the axiom. Guns don't jump up and rip throats out. Sure, there are "gentler" breeds that are responsible for more biting incidents. Labs probably bite more kids than most breeds. But that's a bite... Or a nip after an hour of being tortured by some little darling hanging on to his tail and whacking him in the balls with a plastic bat. As troubling as such a bite may be... It's just not the same as a dog who's whole ancestral history has been about fighting and killing. Not biting. -killing-. A lab will bite a hand, but a pit will tear a throat out. The difference is not subtle.

37 posted on 12/14/2013 7:04:23 PM PST by Ramius (Personally, I give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: Ramius
I used the words attack their owner, not bite. I was very specific in my wording. I met a tow truck driver who had a Chow, raised from a puppy, viciously attack him at a party he was hosting. The dog literally ripped his face off - tearing skin and muscle up over his head. The people were so freaked out they couldn't even muster a 911 call so he had to call himself. That's what I mean by attack.

All dogs have the same instinct to attack the neck if they're in kill mode. Obviously, pit bulls are more dangerous due to their bite strength, lack of fear, and they're impervious to pain (I saw a pit bull attack a horse on Galveston beach, get kicked and thrown back about 15 - 20 feet, get back up and chase the horse down the beach). Plus, irresponsible a-holes tend to raise them to burnish their macho image. Mastiff's are giant Lion hunters (so the story goes), but they're some of the sweetest dogs I've ever encountered. But their size and strength make them a serious danger if they're unstable. Big dogs can, and do, big damage. Little dogs can be just as fearless and aggressive, but they're unlikely to kill an adult. Children - yes:

Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds. The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family's Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed. Note, however, that they were bred to be watchdogs!

70 posted on 12/15/2013 3:19:55 PM PST by uncommonsense (Liberals see what they believe; Conservatives believe what they see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Ramius
I would add that I will never own a pit bull due to their strength and liability (especially after witnessing the Galveston horse attack incident). Nor would I own a Rottweiler, Chow, German Shepherd (I was almost killed by the family "pet" as a baby, but my dad caught it mid-air lunging for me), and several breeds of Terriers - they're unstable based on my experience and powerful. Plus I wouldn't own a Malamute, Golden Retriever, Lab, or Chihuahua. I don't care for their dispositions. Each breed has their own quirks. But any breed can be well heeled, or dangerous based on their daily activity, training, or lack of.

I "like" all dogs, but especially Dobermans, English Mastiffs (except they slobber and don't live long), most hunting dogs, and the Maltese.

71 posted on 12/15/2013 4:13:40 PM PST by uncommonsense (Liberals see what they believe; Conservatives believe what they see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson