"Bad Dogs" or "Bad Owners"

[Nonprophet]

All that is true, but until the day that iRobot starts selling a Boomba that can zip around by itself shooting people, the difference is that dogs can, and almost always have, attacked without being directed to do so. Banning breeds may not be a valid response, requiring proof of training and insurance to own them, might be.

I would argue that when you are the owner of an animal, in my opinion, failure to properly socialize and train ANY dog is a willful act and as such is a decision to have a dog who may or may not "attack without being directed to do so" therefore the blame is again laid at the feet of the owner. In the end there is no "bad dog" because animals aren't capable of making moral decisions. They act and react based on instinct and the instincts of animals are basically the same. Some dogs, by their nature, have a higher prey drive and often more other animal aggression as part of their makeup but again that can be handled through proper breeding, socialization and training. While a Pit Bull may have a high prey drive, the fact is that retrievers and labradors have an even higher one. Bully breed dogs are also generally less tolerant of other dogs, but the same can be said for the Chow Chow and doesn't translate to people. SOme of the biggest problems a breed faces is being taken from their mothers too early so that they don't learn proper basic socialization and not being properly trained and socialized into their human pack. Without those things all dogs are dangerous and aggressive. Statistically LAbs and Poodles bite more people than all the "menace breeds" (I hate that title :mad :) ever have. The problem is that a bully breed or designated menace breed look meaner, have been used in dogfighting and by drug dealers as deterrents and as such have gotten a lot of press and are more newsworthy. Because of this reporters are far more likely to hype these attacks up. I'll get off my soapbox now but will close with, it can't be said that breed has NOTHING to do with a dogs tendencies but it has very little to do and with any sort of training can be dealt with..... oh and P.S. Proud owner past and present of American STaffordshire Terriers and Doberman Pinscher. Here's the big mean Staffy letting my sister's dog have his favorite posession:

[ATTACH]16157[/ATTACH]

[jackknifeh]

True about cats and dogs being raised together. My dog now has been around 5 - 7 full grown cats (and kittens also) since she was a puppy and plays with them. They play with her too. They learn each other's behaviour patterns. She is like the big dumb kid when they play. She sometimes just covers them up.

Jack

I want to add to this about dogs and cats. When my dog (1/2 pitt and 1/2 mutt, around 60 lbs now) was a puppy she was playing with a kitten. I looked over to see both laying on their sides and the kitten's head in Tasha's (the dog) mouth. They just layed there for about 4-5 seconds before the kitten snatched her head out and jumped on Tasha's throat for the killer blow. :D
If I had that on video it would have been on UTube.

Jack
PS
Has anyone seen the video on utube with the crow feeding and taking care of a homeless kitten? This went on for weeks or maybe months. As far as I know they are still friends. People who witnessed and filmed this were convinced the kitten would have starved if the crow (or someone) hadn't helped it. My wife has the video. I'll post it when I can. Any animal can get along with another at times.

[jackknifeh]

I finally voted on this. I voted it's all the owner. I don't think that 100% true but is the closest to the truth out of the choices. I'd say maybe 90% owner and 10% breed.

Jack

[dsmegst]

I'd say part breed and larger part owner. We have two golden retrievers and while they are very gentle spirited, I never leave our boy alone with them. The male dog went through a phase in his early years where he thought he was higher in the dominance chain than my wife. It took a lot of time to fix that and while I've never had ANY issues with either of them, I won't ignore the fact that they are still animals.

[Diamondback]

Some dog breeds have been genetically selected for aggressive traits...no doubt about it, and an owner can "amplify" those aggressive propensities through training and behavior modification, or de-emphasize those traits. When an agressive bred becomes an extension of a human sociopathic ego....those dogs can be very dangerous.

[Blerv]

This thread has clearly proved one depressing fact: Too many cat haters.

So very sad. :p

[TomTerrific]

This thread has clearly proved one depressing fact: Too many cat haters.

So very sad. :p

Go over to the show your pet thread. 75% cat pics. :eek:

[Tank]

This thread has clearly proved one depressing fact: Too many cat haters.

So very sad. :p

I have cats too and love em. One is best friends with my dogs.

[Nonprophet]

first off its Wikipedia-

secondly what breed is this? is it known or was this just some drunks looking to have fun?

heck the russians tried to breed people with chimps to get a more aggressive human-

just shows how screwed up man can be

i take it your not the type who had had dogs his while life-if you did i think our opinions about them would be about equal-

a bad dog can also be retrained quite often -this alone to me proves its more what the human does to the dog than its bloodlines

Without being a scholar I consider myself pretty well informed on the history of dogs and most things dog related. Let me say it this way and if you want to do the research please feel free: ALL dogs with the square head were bred for aggressiveness. All square headed dogs, Rotts, Pits, AmStaffs, bulldogs, amercian bulldogs, french bulldogs, cur dogs, etc etc were bread from the Original Mastiff. They were bred from them to gain the square head which from a physics standpoint allows greater strength in the jaws for biting and holding. Mastiffs were bred for fighting and protecting the masters home, both aggressive jobs. The dog bred for bullbaiting originally was the standard bulldog. It was bred for tenacity and jaw strength and it is the originaotr of the ring in the bulls nose. The dog would grab it and hold on until the bull exhausted itself from thrashing about. Most times the dogs died as well. I can go an and on in the history of most of the working dog class if you'd like. The only reason I go there is because those dogs were bred for aggressiveness in the past and all effort is being made by RESPONSIBLE breeders to breed that out of them but in the end Ken IS correct in his assessment even if it is wikipedia he quotes. I don't believe that a majority of aggression is the "fault" of the dog. Dogs aren't capable of being at fault because they aren't willful, everything they do has to do with nature and instinct. A dog will bite another dog as a warning, even a non aggressive one, and is probably what happened to Ken when he was young. This isn't anyone's fault but it shows that the dog didn't know how to interact in that situation, the owner and everyone else didn't recognize his warning signs and an accident happened. That's what it really is because again dogs don't make conscious efforts to be "mean" or nice. They don't love the way we understand it...they are animals and the act/react as such. While some bit of nature can be seen in aggression even a "bad" or dangerous dog can be rehabilitated but it takes a special kind of person to do it. Just like some breeds are harder to train, some breeds in general tend to be more aggressive. This doesn't make them bad it just means that, much like firearms a person should know what they have and what care it requires if they are going to own it.

[Nonprophet]

I have owned chows and 3 chows come to mind. We had a couple of others with no interesting stories at all. Just regular dogs.

1. Not mine. Several year old chow owned by animal lovers. Very kind people. I played with the dog on several occasions. One day the dog jumped from a laying down position and attacked the woman for no reason she knew of doing considerable damage. The dog didn't see nightfall.

2. We got a full grown chow from a military family going overseas and couldn't take him. When we went to the house to see the dog we sat at the dining room table and the dog trotted around the table watching us and if we moved suddenly we were told the dog would get more aggressive but has never bitten anyone. The owner of the dog led the dog and put him in the back seat of our car. From that point on the dog accepted us as his humans. He played with our 5 year old son wonderfully. When someone he didn't know came to visit he acted like he did toward us when we first saw him. I would have trusted that dog to protect my son over any other dog I've ever seen.

3. This was the bad dog. I say this because if you tried to pick him up as a puppy before his eyes were even open he would snarl and bite like a killer wolf looking for his next meal. I don't remember why but we got that dog. We thought he would calm down. When he was older we took him to a training class. The class was to train people how to train their dogs. I took the coarse and loved it. I have "house trained" as well as other tasks (sit, stay, etc.) 3 dogs since very easily. It's amazing how easy it is if you have patience, consistancy and a smart dog. I took the bad dog to the class one time. The instructor put her hand in a leather glove leaving the fingers empty and the bad dog finally quit bitting the fingers when he realized he wasn't accomplishing anything. After messing with him a little more the instructor said she would give up on this dog. If he could be settled down it would take more time than she had ever spent on any dog. We let him run in the house but we knew not to make sudden moves (our son was older by now). He did nip a couple of people and he ended up in the kennels for the rest of his life. Our yard is an acre and at the time we had chain link "kennels" set up. I could feed him and play with him but only people he knew and people who knew how to play with him could play with him. This dog was "show quality" and the result of "controlled" breeding. I've heard that in-breeding causes brain damage but I don't think in-breeding was the case here according to the pedigree. This was about 15 years ago and won't happen again at my house.

These were three completely different stories with only one thing in common, the breed. I'm not sure you can say the "breed" is the fault. I think it is more how the dog is raised and trained. Kind of similar to people maybe. The first story is the only one I don't understand.

Jack
Edit: I didn't vote because I just don't know. I do have a few cat "horror" stories but I'll save that for the satanic cat thread. lol

I can shed a little light on that, chows were originally bred to be aggressive. They were guard dogs and fighting dogs. They were the Chinese version of the Bully breed of dogs. A fun example is that cute wrinkly skind and black tongue...the skin was so that if an animal got ahold of it's neck the dog would not be killed or rendered unable to fight because it would almost always get the loose skin and not the vital parts underneath. The tongue was a mutation that was found and bred for to strike fear in the hearts of PEOPLE when the guard dogs barked and all they could see was a black tongue, sort of demonic. Chows suffer from that and a LOT of inbreeding and as such a person must be selective and careful because they had aggression bred into them for a lot of years and it'll take a lot more to work that out of them.

[jackknifeh]

I can shed a little light on that, chows were originally bred to be aggressive. They were guard dogs and fighting dogs. They were the Chinese version of the Bully breed of dogs. A fun example is that cute wrinkly skind and black tongue...the skin was so that if an animal got ahold of it's neck the dog would not be killed or rendered unable to fight because it would almost always get the loose skin and not the vital parts underneath. The tongue was a mutation that was found and bred for to strike fear in the hearts of PEOPLE when the guard dogs barked and all they could see was a black tongue, sort of demonic. Chows suffer from that and a LOT of inbreeding and as such a person must be selective and careful because they had aggression bred into them for a lot of years and it'll take a lot more to work that out of them.

That's interesting and it sounds like this info came from a valid source. I've heard stuff like this before about chows and other breeds also but it was just "bar" talk. Do you have any thoughts on the first story I told. The dog as far as I know had never been aggressive even to strangers. He was friendly the day I met him. They had owned the dog for years. This one day my friend was sweeping the kitchen floor and the dog was laying there. When she got close to him he jumped up and tore most of the flesh from one finger and tore her arm up pretty good but didn't hit an artery. No warning or history to indicate this would happen unless you count the "stories" about chows. Chows aren't the only breed with those stories either. I've even heard (and read an article) about St. Bernard's not being trustworthy as pets because of unpredictable behaviour. There were examples in the article of St. Bs behaving just like my friend's dog. It was a surprising subject even to the writer because they are viewed as rescue dogs. Or is that just the cartoons?

Jack

[yowzer]

This thread has clearly proved one depressing fact: Too many cat haters.

Hey, I voted for our feline overlords.

[Nonprophet]

Jack, well the source is basically my own research and reading the AKC standards for breeds and the histories on them. I'm kind of a dog lover and I like to read about them. As for your other story, it depends entirely on the situation and the dogs history. Some possibilities: the dog had a bad experience with a broom as a pup, the dog was startled and felt threatened, maybe the dog felt that someone in it's "pack" was threatening or being threatened by the big bad broom. It all just depends on the totality of the circumstances, especially in a dog bred forever to protect and defend. The problem is that a Chow is considered a medium sized breed or even large breed and one or two startled warning bites or fear bites can hurt a human very badly. Some dogs bit to warn and if it isn't trained out of them early things like this can happen. Putting that dog down isn't an unreasonable response, especially if you don't have access to a place that takes and rehabilitates dogs with those types of problems. At the end of the day the causes of these sorts of things in dogs is about as various as the causes of antisocial behavior in people. Some learn it, some gravitate to it, and some are presented with the "perfect storm" (psychology term for the day ther kiddos:rolleyes :) of circumstances that causes an otherwise normal person to go on a murderous rampage, trust me it happens. It has as little to do with breed as race, creed, color, gender or geographical location do for criminality in humans.

[Nonprophet]

Jack, I failed to read #3 but this one is probably the easiest to understand. It was one of two things I would bet a paycheck on it! Either A the dog was an Alpha in his litter and was used to pushing his litter mates around to get to the food or B the dog didn't get left with his mother and his litter long enough. Most likely it was a combination fo the two. He was aggressive as a very small pup (up to 8 weeks) and was taken from the litter to be sold prior to that. At around that time the mother will usually correct such poor behavior in the pups and they learn lessons that last a lifetime. Deprive them of that correction at that incredibly critical moment in their development and you can battle it for the rest of the dogs life. They learn aggression (which is natural) without the corrections that teach them to control it and stop it. This is a dog that can get out of control and isn't safe without training. I had a pitbull that way once.... the exact reason that a person should never take pups out of their litter any earlier than 8 weeks and 12 is better and if a person wants to sell you a dog that is 5, or 6 weeks old (common practice by the way) you should insist on them staying until at least 8 weeks and even then you are learning something about the breeder that maybe you want to take a long second look at the dogs they are raising. ok off my soapbox again....

[*Cho*]

A fun example is that cute wrinkly skind and black tongue...the skin was so that if an animal got ahold of it's neck the dog would not be killed or rendered unable to fight because it would almost always get the loose skin and not the vital parts underneath.

The dog with all the wrinkles is a Shar-pei.

[jackknifeh]

Jack, well the source is basically my own research and reading the AKC standards for breeds and the histories on them. I'm kind of a dog lover and I like to read about them. As for your other story, it depends entirely on the situation and the dogs history. Some possibilities: the dog had a bad experience with a broom as a pup, the dog was startled and felt threatened, maybe the dog felt that someone in it's "pack" was threatening or being threatened by the big bad broom. It all just depends on the totality of the circumstances, especially in a dog bred forever to protect and defend. The problem is that a Chow is considered a medium sized breed or even large breed and one or two startled warning bites or fear bites can hurt a human very badly. Some dogs bit to warn and if it isn't trained out of them early things like this can happen. Putting that dog down isn't an unreasonable response, especially if you don't have access to a place that takes and rehabilitates dogs with those types of problems. At the end of the day the causes of these sorts of things in dogs is about as various as the causes of antisocial behavior in people. Some learn it, some gravitate to it, and some are presented with the "perfect storm" (psychology term for the day ther kiddos:rolleyes :) of circumstances that causes an otherwise normal person to go on a murderous rampage, trust me it happens. It has as little to do with breed as race, creed, color, gender or geographical location do for criminality in humans.

You may be right about an experience with a broom as a pup. It would have had to be repressessed because the dog was several years old when the attack occurred. I got a dog from the pound YEARS ago that was just over one year old. We had her for a while when she saw me with my son't pellet gun. She immediately ran. I thought some kids had shot her when she was with the family before us.

Jack, I failed to read #3 but this one is probably the easiest to understand. It was one of two things I would bet a paycheck on it! Either A the dog was an Alpha in his litter and was used to pushing his litter mates around to get to the food or B the dog didn't get left with his mother and his litter long enough. Most likely it was a combination fo the two. He was aggressive as a very small pup (up to 8 weeks) and was taken from the litter to be sold prior to that. At around that time the mother will usually correct such poor behavior in the pups and they learn lessons that last a lifetime. Deprive them of that correction at that incredibly critical moment in their development and you can battle it for the rest of the dogs life. They learn aggression (which is natural) without the corrections that teach them to control it and stop it. This is a dog that can get out of control and isn't safe without training. I had a pitbull that way once.... the exact reason that a person should never take pups out of their litter any earlier than 8 weeks and 12 is better and if a person wants to sell you a dog that is 5, or 6 weeks old (common practice by the way) you should insist on them staying until at least 8 weeks and even then you are learning something about the breeder that maybe you want to take a long second look at the dogs they are raising. ok off my soapbox again....

We got the dog as a pup when he was between 8 and 9 weeks old (according to the breeder). My wife and I had visited the people a couple of times after the dog was born and I don't think we got it sooner than that but I can't remember exactly. It was a long time ago. I do know we saw the puppy before it's eyes were open because I remember it biting before they opened.

I guess dog behaviour is as hard to explain as human behaviour.

Jack

[The Mastiff]

I've been fortunate to have owned, and worked with dogs most all of my life. This includes some very large, and powerful breeds. I've got a few feelings about the subject.

The very base of any successful relationship between a dog and a human is based on trust, security, and yes, a basic knowledge of dog language, needs, and understanding of the pack dynamic.

Dog etiquette, if you will.

Dogs need leaders. They want leadership and if you aren't capable in their eyes , for the security of the family unit they will attempt to take control if they are assertive, or withdraw and become insecure if they aren't. Dogs are not well equipped to be leaders in this world, and trouble follows. Likewise, insecurity makes them prone to another sort of problem. Neither is acceptable in an environment that has them around people or animals outside the family unit.

Family members are rarely at risk even from these types, on purpose. The dog method of reprimanding an underling is a snap to the face. Not meant to hurt, but they don't really understand how fragile a 3 year old kid can be.

Good pack leaders can be either large powerful men, or, small older women, or anything in between. You don't need a forceful personality if you know what you are doing. You should never need physical force, or you are doing something wrong.

Some breeds do need stronger leadership, just like some breeds might need special grooming, or more exercise.

Yes, this does mean that certain people are incompatible with certain types of animals. Bad dogs? Not really, IMO.

[Bluntrauma]

I fall into the category of thinking that the wrong people get the wrong breeds. Seems you always see the guy with the small man/appendage complex bulking up with the bad *** dog. I think good training and socializing is critical with dogs that seem to have a propensity to be more aggressive.

I have owned both a chow chow and a pit bull and had no temperament problem with either dog. Another problem I have found especially with pits is that people don't know what they are getting into when they get the dog. They do not take the necessary steps in proper training and socializing and when the dog misbehaves or shows any sign of aggression, they ship them off to the local shelter or pound.

Then that problem in a grown up dog gets passed on to someone who cannot correct deeply ingrained issues. I worked in the pet business for over a decade and owned a pet shop for several years and I can tell you without reservation that the most aggressive dog and quickest to bite in a grooming setting was always the cocker spaniel.

They have been line bred for looks for so many years that they have bred a fear biting monster out of a good portion on the breed. You have to understand the dogs proclivities to ensure that the dog does not get into a situation which will create a situation. Same holds true with other breeds. I am by no means demonizing cockers. They make great pets for people but do have their issues. Same can be said for multiple breeds.



I do not buy the premise that the breed is bad, for the most part it is a failure on the owner that did not do the proper research and training before they chose a certain breed of dog.

[jackknifeh]

I've been fortunate to have owned, and worked with dogs most all of my life. This includes some very large, and powerful breeds. I've got a few feelings about the subject.

The very base of any successful relationship between a dog and a human is based on trust, security, and yes, a basic knowledge of dog language, needs, and understanding of the pack dynamic.

Dog etiquette, if you will.

Mastiff, I like what you said about dog language. I tried to move a ham bone I had given my dog when she was about 6 months old. She snarled and nipped toward my hand. It was obvious she didn't try to bite me. To most humans (and me at first) the action appears ferocious bit it's just like one of us saying "HEY, GET AWAY FROM MY HAM BONE". (raised voice) I had to regain my composure, grab the dog by the collar, say NO, then move the bone and let her have it back. Some would think that dog shouldn't be around kids. Dogs around kids is a seperate subject because kids need as much training as the dog does. Don't approach a dog when he is eating is the first thing a child needs to learn. I think it's good for kids to grow up with dogs that way they'll learn dog language and make fewer mistakes. When I was a kid I saw kids being mean to a chained puppy. They poked him with sticks, called him knowing he would run to the length of his chain and get yanked off his feet, etc. Of course that dog grew up mean and then wasn't there anymore by the time he was maybe one year old. I hope he went to a good home.

Jack

[The Deacon]

Yes, this does mean that certain people are incompatible with certain types of animals. Bad dogs? Not really, IMO.

Joe, I respect your opinion, and would agree that there are no "bad breeds". However, I think that, just like people, the dog world has its share of bad individuals. Like humans, some of those are the product of bad breeding, some the product of bad upbringing, and some are just born evil for no discernible reason.

Again, just as with people, whether the root cause of the attack is nature or nurture matters not a whit when it is you that's being attacked. I wouldn't care whether a human attacker had been beaten by his dad, forced to wear dresses by his mom, bullied by his classmates, molested by his priest, or just born with a screwed up mind, I'd do my damnedest to stop the attack even if that meant killing him. Same with dogs.