cookstar

iTrader: (6)

Can you, I cant.

Will I take the risk and leave my childs safety in a strangers hands - NO


Not having a pop at yu mate, just dont see the point of these foul things ever existing in the first place, oh yes thats right they were fighting dogs wernt they

cookstar

iTrader: (6)

AudiLover

whats it biting?

cookstar

iTrader: (6)

anything that pisses it off i guess

cookstar

iTrader: (6)

PG

I didn't see the full vid (so it may have mentioned the following) the film / documentary Off The Chain is an insight in to the whole Pit Bull fighting scene. As a dog lover I watched it out of morbid curiosity more than anything else. One guy in particular had his dog doped up and was sharpening its teeth with a Dremel tool. Some of it was very hard to watch but at the same time the dogs were cared for very well in some cases......well up until the whole mauling each other to death thing.

Suresh

Some interesting research on dog bites from the BMJ site that tends to bust some of the common myths held by dog lovers -

http://ip.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/7/4/321


- In a Canadian study of A&E victims, the dog had no previous history of biting in 72% of all cases.

- Most dangerous dog breeds include German Shepherd, Pit bull and Rottweiler

- No surprise that children under 4 are the most common victims, typically sustaining injuries to the face and head

- In more than 70% of cases the victim was known to the dog


I really don't want to hear anymore unfounded arguments about how someones dangerous pet isn't that type of animal. Potentionally, they all are!

sarasquares

iTrader: (1)

i have a chihuahua puppy and she can rip tissue up

Diablo

They are only fighting because of human intervention Cookie.

Diablo

LOL

Dogs bark, they have teeth. Any dog, regardless of breed can be photographed in that pose.

But I can appreciate your concerns. In any event, you are forgetting one thing - Pit bulls are officially classed as a dangerous dog in the UK and, I believe, may only be kept under certain circumstances. (if at all) and must be muzzled if in public by law.

They may even be banned in this country.

I can also appreciate your concerns when any dog runs up to your child in the park. Its only natural you will feel this way as a parent.

However, just as the dog wner should be a responsible owner and have their dog under control, you should be a responsible parent and have your child under safe control.

The Snug Rhino

Are you even slightly serious? If this chap is in the park and watching his child play from a distance, lets say 60m.......are you suggesting that this is a dabgerous act on the part of the parent because 60m is not close enough that he could reach his child before a dog that may also be heading his kids way?

A large dog in a park is POTENTIALY dangerous, a small child in a park is NOT.

Rhino

(out of interest...do you have any of your own children?)

Diablo

And here we go again,

There are no myths Suresh.

There will always be bad dogs, just as there will also be bad people.

You have, yourself, admitted to what many would consider unacceptibly agressive threatening behavour to a lone woman in the park who's dog was in your opinion out of control although clearly of no danger. Should you be put down for that?

Dogs with a history of biting tend to be put down (for very good reasons) and hence there will always be a first time.

The study does not show that the breeds you listed are the most dangerous, but rather where there are fatalities those breeds are more commonly involved.

Obvious reasons really - size and strength.

I will accept that one fatality is too many, but if you are going to quote from statistics you should really get it right. Cars kill more people than dogs do - should cars be banned?

What the statistics don't show is that those are the breeds favoured by the less than desirable elements of society. The action should, therefore, be taken against the individuals themselves, rather than the breeds stereotyped.

Perhaps if you, and others like you, put your efforts into campaigning against irresponsible ownership rather than simply stereotyping the dog and calling for the banning of their breeds.

Any animal has the ability to cause a human harm, just as any human has the ability to cause another human harm. As humans we should be responsible for our own actions, and those of our animals and our dependants.

Children will always be more susceptible to injury - its not rocket science - its about comparative size.

I would hope my dogs would never willfully cause injury to anyone. But I am not so stupid as to ever forget that they are large strong animals with sharp teeth. Which is why the are never out of my sight or control when out and about - if nothing else, I am appreciative that not everyone is a dog lover, as is their absolute right.

Strangely, even that doesn't even work, and I had some middle aged ******** spout verbal abuse at my wife and I when we were out the other day with them both walking perfectly to heel on the lead, apparently for daring to walk on a public path within ten feet of him.

Wasn't you Suresh, by chance?

And here's something for those posting on the thread to think about, particularly as a parent.

Dogs exist. People have them. You will meet dogs in the park. I would suggest therefore that you have a responsibility to your children to at least have a basic understanding of dog behavour, and teach your children a basic understanding of dog behavioir, much as you would teach them not to play with cars.

Most dog training clubs will welcome visits for this very purpose.

So why not do something about it, learn a bit about animal behavior, understand the issues, good and bad (for your child's benefit if nothing else) put your efforts into dealing with the cause (people, society) rather than bleating on here from behind a keyboard about banning dogs.

Anyway, here's something to start with:-

Despite what this may look like, this is natural, instinctive play. It's what dogs do:-



Interestingly, you may also be interested to know (assuming you've decided to open your mind a little bit) that the police force in this country don't use Rottweilers for general police duties, because they are unable to train them to be agressive enough...

They are finding the same problem with German Shepherds.

And to put some balance on Cooikie's posts showing what are probably dogs tragically trained to fight by some of societies low life scum, for pleasure and more likely financial gain, and generaly not someone's family pet, here's a real "dangerous dog" in the more commonly observed position

adzipalmer

ah

Diablo

I'm suggesting that if he is concerned his child is likely to be attacked, he shouldn't be 60m away, in the same way he should be concerned about suspicious people in the park.

I'm not saying that any dog is not potentially dangerous - although statistically it is highly unlikely.

I don't have children, however before you go down the "ah you wouldn't understand route" a) I was one, and was brought up with various breeds since birth, b) If I did have, It would not change my attitude as a responsible dog owner and hopefully as a responsible parent and c) It would be tought form an early age to respect dogs of all sizes.

I certainly wouldn't be "cacking my pants" everytime a dog approached him or her, on the grounds that I have a decent understanding of dog behavour and that the chances of a rogue dog appearing out of no where and attacking my child in the park for no apparent reason are somewhere between slim and non existant.

In the highly unlikely event that you frequent parks with "savage" dogs running loose, then I suggest you frequent somewhere differerent

The Snug Rhino

no, what you said was:

"you should be a responsible parent and have your child under safe control."

what does that mean in a park? The kid is playing some distance from the adult...is that ok or should the child be walking to heel?

There is a dog running in the park...is it still ok for that child to not be near the parent or does "safe control" now mean you feel the child should be called back to the parent?

When i walk my kids in the park there should be very little that means they can be off on their own (within site)

When i walk my dogs (which i appreciate scare some people) i do so in areas where there are no children (or not likley to be) in the same way i wouldnt choose to go cycling through a shopping a mall.

i would still love to know what you mean by "your child under safe control."

Rhino

The Snug Rhino

no, what you said was:

"you should be a responsible parent and have your child under safe control."

what does that mean in a park? The kid is playing some distance from the adult...is that ok or should the child be walking to heel?

There is a dog running in the park...is it still ok for that child to not be near the parent or does "safe control" now mean you feel the child should be called back to the parent?

When i walk my kids in the park there should be very little that means they cant be off on their own (within site)

When i walk my dogs (which i appreciate scare some people) i do so in areas where there are no children (or not likley to be) in the same way i wouldnt choose to go cycling through a shopping a mall.

i would still love to know what you mean by "your child under safe control."

Rhino

sociopath

Good essay Diablo, well done son!

Diablo

Diablo

Safe control - simple. You, as a parent are satified they are in a safe position and that they are under your responsible stewardship.

As opposed to "little Jonny drowned/got run over/fell of the bridge" because the parent was not in a position to do anything about it.


As for "safe" - thats up to you, whatever you are comfortable with.

There are any number of avoidable "events" that can and do happen to children out playing, accidental or not, which are much more common than kids in the park being "attacked" by dogs.

silverstrike

I'm with you Diablo.....

humans have hands, dogs only have their mouths..

if we feel threatened we use our hands as defence, if a dog feels threatened it uses it's only form of defence, it's mouth..

I'm the owner of 3 Boxers, all which are very obedient and very much loved dogs...

I'm with the licence idea.. it will rid most of these poor/evil/amatuer owners out, not completely, but it will put dog owning in a different perspective. Only problem is down to wealth, you could have a really good owner, with not alot of money, therefore cant afford to keep a dog... so this idea does have it's pitfalls.

I myself have never been bitten by any big dogs, but i've been bitten 3-4 times by terriers, and my dogs have also been attacked by terriers... makes you wonder eh????

The Snug Rhino

so nothing to do with the topic in question then.

Brendan Hughes

If only that technique could be applied to other SNetters ...

Suresh

By your own admission the animals act on instinct, nothing to do with good or bad. Interesting that the most dangerous breeds can't be trained to be agressive on demand.


Who said it was a lone woman? How do you know it was clearly of no danger? Were you actually there or are you just being a ****?

If some inconsiderate dog owner can't control their pet and chooses to illegally let it off it's leash and it approaches a small child agressively then they will get what's coming to them - and that would include you and your Burberry-clad army by the way.

Dogs exist indeed and agressive ones get destroyed which is a very good thing of course and long may it continue. Why do people feel they need a dim, imaginery companion? Is there something else lacking in their lives? You have a good point that children need to understand that large dogs need to be avoided as they can be dangerous and unpredictable and that owners of said beasts are typically incredible bores.

JackClark

VG.

spectrum48k

frightening

JackClark

This is Randal he hasn't bitten anyone who didn't put their hand in his mouth, he's part Pit Bull.

silverstrike

^^^ lovely dog......

Diablo

My apologies, perhaps I should have expanded to say "there will always be dogs that through adverse human interaction, and improper training, or very occasionally illness, will exhibit unfavourable and non instinctive behavior"


Your post:

http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showpost....0&postcount=33

On the basis that you weren't mauled to death by her furry friend, or even threatened, one may deduce that there was no danger. Most certainly, threating to rip the owner's throat out would not have allayed the dog's desire to savage you and your family had it so intended.

As for "lone woman" I doubt very much that you would have acted in such a manner had she been accompanied. But then again, I doubt very much that you did, in fact, address her in the manner to which you alluded and were merely "bigging it up" for the post.

Firstly, check the law. Secondly, given that you clearly have no idea or understanding of dog behaviour, you are in no position to establish whether or not the approach was aggressive. And thirdly, not that is of any real relevance, I have neither any burberry apparel, nor do I have a Burberry-clad army.

How appropriate though, and how expected, that you should stereotype me in the way you stereotype the various breeds.

I doubt very much that you would be any position to "give me what's coming to me" (oh, how brave of you!), not because I'm going to do the whole keyboard warrior "bring it on" thing, but rather because you would most likely be too busy trying to work out if excited faces and wagging tails meant "death to all" or simply, "hello" to do much else.

No disagreement from me there.

Judging from the content and tone of your posts I'd wager that my "dim" companion(s) are on an equal footing with you in the intelligence stakes. As for something "lacking", who knows, perhaps for some that is the case - although I remain a happily married and fulfilled individual. Indeed, for many elderly people who's partners have passed on and who's families have "better" things to do, the companionship of a dog is invaluable to them. Likewise the theraputic roles dogs can play. Its a proven fact that many children, with physical or mental disabilities respond extremely well when interacting with dogs.

As for filling a void, much the same can be said of many things, Suresh, from having children to driving fancy cars.

Tell me, why did you have a child - to fill a void? Because it was expected of you? Because the contraception failed? because you and your partner ran out of things to talk about? Or (hopefully for the child's sake) was it for all the right reasons. Think about it carefully before you answer, and be honest with yourself - your answer is to be fair, irrelevant to all but you.

If that works for you then fine

If I may so enquire, what is your racial and or cultural background? Many races and cultures have far less respect for animals (just as many have a good deal more). If you fall into the former grouping, it is perhaps understandable that you hold the views you do.

Cheers

D

davegtt

By your way of thinking all dogs should be put down regardless of the breed. You come across as very small minded

I own this little beasty.



Hes soft as ****, he was even attacked a couple of weeks ago by a young collie (probably one of the most intelligent breeds of dogs on the planet) he was on the lead and all he wanted to do was stand and hide behind me, You cant say what type of breed is nasty and which isnt. Ive seen far more little terriers and working dogs been more agressive than Bull Breeds. As Diablo has been trying to explain, alot of dog behaviour is about the owner and its upbringing. Just like your upbringing probably gives you the opinion that dogs are nasty.

cookstar

iTrader: (6)

[quote=Diablo]LOL

Dogs bark, they have teeth. Any dog, regardless of breed can be photographed in that pose.

But I can appreciate your concerns. In any event, you are forgetting one thing - Pit bulls are officially classed as a dangerous dog in the UK and, I believe, may only be kept under certain circumstances. (if at all) and must be muzzled if in public by law.

They may even be banned in this country.

I can also appreciate your concerns when any dog runs up to your child in the park. Its only natural you will feel this way as a parent.

However, just as the dog wner should be a responsible owner and have their dog under control, you should be a responsible parent and have your child under safe control.[/quote]



My 6 year old is incabable of covering vast amounts of distance in a matter of seconds,

Could you run after and catch a six year old - Yes

Could you run after and catch a pitbull - No


Im not sure what the NSPCC would say if I muzzled my son in public either