"I wouldn't hurt a flea....really...."
Posted on 11/19/2006 11:23:41 PM PST by Omega Man II
And people who own a labrador, a rottweiler, and a toy cocker spaniel are more likely to own guns, drive a Dodge 4X4 and collect Beanie Babies.
You forget that "gaffer" also has another meaning beyond a stage electrician....
You could try Federal 180 grain Hollow Point or Hornady 158 grain JHP/XTP on the dogs but experience has shown that results will be much more satifacty if these are used on the punks first.
Jumping to conclusions? Where did you get that from?
I am sincerely interested in your response. What is it that gets into these dogs that kill people and animals? Or all these reports all lies, including the ones personally known to people who post here?
Are you saying the reported experiences of the people who posted on these threads are only their "opinions"? That it is only my "opinion" that a pit bull in my town perpetrated the attack/killing I have described here in detail more than once? It's not a "fact" that that incident occurred, therefore no one has to engage that fact?
Why is it impossible for some people to admit that even a few of these dogs perpetrate unprovoked killings?
You seem to have quite a lot of confidence in your knowledge of these dogs. So it's too bad you won't address these incidents and give your insight. Or is the only explanation always "bad owners"?
Are the dead animals and people only "faulty perceptions," as you stated?
Wow, on top it, these dogs were in Alaska? That's sad. Like you said, I didn't think Dobies did too well in extreme cold climes.
I guess you're right. (/s) There seems to be no explanation for why those who champion and love these dogs won't help the rest of us understand what goes wrong when [insert the many examples from upthread here] the family pet gets out and, oh, kills the neighbor's horse or child.
All I am asking is for someone to give me some insight into this aberrant behavior. How does a dog go from beloved family pet to killer? Just askin.
Oh, wait I forgot. It's all lies! Pitbulls don't attack and kill any more frequently than other dogs, that's just "unfounded fear" talking. Yeah. /s
Brad Pitt has no bulls.
So if you own a pitt bull type of dog and you get a speeding ticket, you are labeled a criminal owner of a pitt bull.
Again with the reference to Brad Pitt and some bulls.
What the heck are you talking about?
It surely isn't pit bull dogs.
Hahahaahaha!!!
Hey, I bet boa constrictor owners have a few more skeletons in their closet too when compared to, say, owners of cats.
Lord. This is such a non-story.
I lost my Rott to death a few months ago. Bad heart. Lord, I miss him.
In my town, they're trying to outlaw them and pitt bulls. My attitude was "over my dead friggin' body."
You see, for the gubment, owners aren't responsible, animals are. Incredible how nanny-fied this nation has become.
I hear ya. I lost my first Rott 4 years ago to cancer. He was my bestest buddy. I still have his collar so I don't forget him.
I've got 2 rotties now, my 2nd and 3rd--sweet as any animals I have ever had. I don't think I can ever have any other kind of dog--Rotts are a universe unto themselves.
If they tried to pull that crap on me, I would have to close up shop and move away. My dogs will never leave my side.
I don't think I will ever own another breed either. Yeah, if they would've said anything to me I would be like "well, he's part Rott, part Doberman."
Of course, he was full blooded German Rott all the way. Got him from a breeder in upstate NY.
Oh, wait I forgot. It's all lies! Pitbulls don't attack and kill any more frequently than other dogs, that's just "unfounded fear" talking. Yeah. /s
I've given you links already that would help you understand the factors involved.
I've pointed out that all dogs are potentially dangerous.
They're descended from carnivorous wolves for Pete's sake.
Some dogs, terriers among them, have a potentially higher prey drive than other types.
Use your brain
If you're just being a bozo and not considering the data
then I won't waste anymore time on you.
In July 2006 it was reported that a 3-year-old girl was killed by a Pit bull in Texas. This case is then added to the running log of Pit bull related fatalities and is concluded to be "evidence' of the breed's aggression. All the other immediate causes for this attack are now ignored.However, investigation into this incident finds that breed of dog was not the driving force behind this attack, nor would addressing this as a breed issue provide any insight which may prevent future dog attacks.
The factors which directly contributed to this fatal attack were:
- Use of dogs in negative functions- The dogs were admittedly used as guard dogs & were used for breeding for profit.
- Dogs were maintained in an environment which provided dangerously low levels of socialization (one chained dog and two yard dogs).
- An unsupervised 3-year-old child was allowed to enter into yard where three dogs (a pack) resided.
- One dog was a very new addition (only 2-3 days earlier) to the residence, thus influencing the behaviors of the resident dogs.
- Reproductive status of dogs - All dogs on the premises were intact, with one dog nursing a litter of puppies.
- Development of pack mentality (not revealed in the media reports was the fact that this child was attacked by two dogs - the Pit bull and another breed dog).
The owners of these dogs failed to take appropriate measures to minimize the possibility of aggression. Failing to sterilize the dogs, allowing them to breed, allowing a pack situation to develop, altering the stress/dynamics by the very recent introduction of a new dog to the residence, chaining and poor socialization of the dogs, and allowing an unsupervised 3-year-old girl to enter into this situation, were factors which contributed to the development of aggression.
Bears more likely to crap in the woods.
Thank you!
At last, someone actually addressed the issue.
BTW, I am not a bozo and I do regularly use my brain.
I realize what you are saying and that, of course, some incidents are not fully reported or appropriately analyzed as to causation.
And I respect that you stated that some breeds, terriers among them, have a higher attack instinct toward prey.
I agree with you that all the factors you note contributed significantly to the fatality in the case you cited. (Again, thank you for going over some specifics, not just dismissing my concerns.)
But these are not the types of cases that concern me (and many others). Even on this thread people have posted personally known stories of very loved and well-cared dogs who, under normal circumstances, attacked people they knew and had been affectionate with.
This is what I don't understand and I don't understand why people who champion these dogs gloss over these types of incidents.
These are incidents that do not appear to have any of the factors that you ably point out in the case you cite. Rather, they appear to have exactly the opposite---beloved family pets in non-threatening situations.
I am not trying to pick a fight with you or be a bozo! I am genuinely interested and concerned. Let's take one case a poster here knows of: the neighbor who knew the pit bull since puppyhood, with the dog regularly wagging his tail, giving kisses and being petted by this man. Then one day the man is in the driveway helping the dog's owner change a tire or something and the dog mauls him (to the tune of 300 stitches), paying no attention to his frantic owner's attempts to get him to stop.
Many dogs will growl even at someone known to them in some situations, but to suddenly launch a full-fledged attack on someone not threatening them directly and someone their owner is "vouching" for?
I don't get it.
Also in many of the cases, one of which recently happened in my town (please read all my posts, if you haven't), the dog got out (i.e., the victim did not intrude onto the dog's territory) and went to great lengths to track down something or someone to kill, such as other dogs that were in their fenced backyard down the street or the neighbor's horse.
That makes no sense to me. And it makes no sense to me that some people find a way to equate---and therefore dismiss---that attack with the type of situation you detailed in your post to me, which had completely different factors, as you pointed out:
"The factors which directly contributed to this fatal attack were:
Use of dogs in negative functions- The dogs were admittedly used as guard dogs & were used for breeding for profit.
Dogs were maintained in an environment which provided dangerously low levels of socialization (one chained dog and two yard dogs).
An unsupervised 3-year-old child was allowed to enter into yard where three dogs (a pack) resided.
One dog was a very new addition (only 2-3 days earlier) to the residence, thus influencing the behaviors of the resident dogs.
Reproductive status of dogs - All dogs on the premises were intact, with one dog nursing a litter of puppies.
Development of pack mentality (not revealed in the media reports was the fact that this child was attacked by two dogs - the Pit bull and another breed dog)."
Maybe I missed it, but I have not seen this situation addressed---where the dog is truly the beloved family pet, well cared-for, well-socialized with other dogs and people, yet one day he attacks and kills. This seems to happen occasionally and my question is why. Or do you not think this ever actually is the case?
Your questions.
So it's too bad you won't address these incidents and give your insight.
How should I address them?
Or is the only explanation always "bad owners"?
Are dogs capable of making moral judgments?
True, but I was trying not to get FR's PETA members all riled up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.