NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/05/02/hero.dog.ap/index.html

The article mentions that the two pit bulls would probably be destroyed. What about the owners? Destroy them! :mad:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/05/02/hero.dog.ap/index.html

The article mentions that the two pit bulls would probably be destroyed. What about the owners? Destroy them! :mad:

That terrier deserves a medal.

And a statue.

Heck, write a book and make a movie about it!

Seriously.

More fucking irresponsible pit bull owners putting the whole breed in danger. Fuck yes. Put the owners of those dogs down. Their actions put my dog's life in danger. Friendly pit bulls have been confiscated and killed because a few scumbags breed vicious dogs or torture their dogs into becoming vicious. Of course now we'll have renewed calls for breed specific legislation that would require people like me to either surrender my dog for euthanasia or buy special insurance I can't afford.

More fucking irresponsible pit bull owners putting the whole breed in danger. Fuck yes. Put the owners of those dogs down. Their actions put my dog's life in danger. Friendly pit bulls have been confiscated and killed because a few scumbags breed vicious dogs or torture their dogs into becoming vicious. Of course now we'll have renewed calls for breed specific legislation that would require people like me to either surrender my dog for euthanasia or buy special insurance I can't afford.

Yeah exactly, it's bullshit. When my grandmother had a house on the river, her neighbor had an old pitbull that wondered around. Perfectly friendly animals to other dogs and children. Every time a dog fighting ring is found or a "dangerous species" of dog hurts some one, put down the owners and investigate the breeder or whoever they got the dog from.

More fucking irresponsible pit bull owners putting the whole breed in danger. Fuck yes. Put the owners of those dogs down. Their actions put my dog's life in danger. Friendly pit bulls have been confiscated and killed because a few scumbags breed vicious dogs or torture their dogs into becoming vicious. Of course now we'll have renewed calls for breed specific legislation that would require people like me to either surrender my dog for euthanasia or buy special insurance I can't afford.

Although I agree in principle, am I wrong in thinking that there is at least potentially some basis for breed-specific legislation? Are not some breeds more naturally agressive (although certainly not to any murderous extent, necessarily) than others? Educate me.

um...the pit bulls wouldn't of attacked a group of 5 anything especially tall animals like people as shown by the fact that they went for the terrier

2 dogs will gang up on another dog though why it got so bad is beyond me odds are this is a one off the owner is probably innocent beyond having his dogs escape

Dogs pick up not only just on verbal cues, which include commands from their own, but non-verbal ones too (ie: body language and tone). A dog reacts to its owner's actions or lack thereof. A dog reflects its owner's will.

A properly trained dog would treat another dog the same way they would a person. "Who are you? Hello I'm 'insert dog's name' and I'm a dog'" They wouldn't say that, but the behavior would be something of that nature. If the dogs get loose and start attacking people or other people's pets than that means the owner is at fault for not training the dogs correctly. Some people might argue that a pit bull is a dangerous breed of dog but it by itself is not, it requires a specific treatment to make a dog into a dangerous animal that will attack. I have only once encountered an unfreindly pit bull, and she had been beeten and malnourished her whole life. I have encountered several pit bulls and witht he exception of her they were all extremly gentle animals (in fact one was afraid of my sisters beagle)

Dogs pick up not only just on verbal cues, which include commands from their own, but non-verbal ones too (ie: body language and tone). A dog reacts to its owner's actions or lack thereof. A dog reflects its owner's will.

so it's my fault that my dog is lazy?:confused:

If the dogs get loose and start attacking people or other people's pets than that means the owner is at fault for not training the dogs correctly.

my dogs been in a few scrapes as has every other dog owners dog I know (hell; my cats been in a few scrapes by the scratches they got once) its not some bad upbringing animals fight as do children

Did your dog initiate the fight or did the dog defend themselves or you? There is a diifference.

And cats.. psshhh.. damn things always get into fights, and you can't really train them.

my dogs been in a few scrapes as has every other dog owners dog I know (hell; my cats been in a few scrapes by the scratches they got once) its not some bad upbringing animals fight as do children

There's a difference between a dogs "getting into scrapes" and attacking. Even my two dogs (wimps that they are) will occasionally have a brief fight over a bone/toy/etc. However, neither has aggressively attacked the other (or a person or other animal) and neither has ended up with more than a scratch or two.

There is a huge difference between a "scrape" and a dog that is attacked and then mauled to death. And that dog could have been one of those children.

Did your dog initiate the fight or did the dog defend themselves or you? There is a diifference.

And cats.. psshhh.. damn things always get into fights, and you can't really train them.

I've seen my cat get in fights with itself.

Did your dog initiate the fight or did the dog defend themselves or you? There is a diifference.

well one that comes to mind is my dog bumped into another dog and they kicked off another time is when my friends dog was playing with another dog and they got into a fight over a ball

there was also the time my dog kept getting pestered by this stray dog that had been following us yet never quite understanding that my dog was telling it to F off and leave her alone in my dogs paws I would of done the same thing

well one that comes to mind is my dog bumped into another dog and they kicked off another time is when my friends dog was playing with another dog and they got into a fight over a ball

there was also the time my dog kept getting pestered by this stray dog that had been following us yet never quite understanding that my dog was telling it to F off and leave her alone in my dogs paws I would of done the same thing

Those were scrapes, not an actual life or death attack. But tell me, what would you do if your dog for no reason attacked someone with the intent to kill?

There is a difference between a play fight or dominance fight than a mauling. A play fight, something might break, usually not the dogs. A dominance fight, one might get a dismissible bite or cut. The little terrier got fucking mauled.

There is a huge difference between a "scrape" and a dog that is attacked and then mauled to death. And that dog could have been one of those children.

I've already pointed out that a dog won't attack a group of 5 humans even if they where children

and now I will point out that people/monkeys/lion cub have been known to do the same thing rare as it is just look at a group of children picking on a weaker member

Those were scrapes, not an actual life or death attack. But tell me, what would you do if your dog for no reason attacked someone with the intent to kill?

(you didn't ask me, but I answer anyway)

kill the dog. ;)

so it's my fault that my dog is lazy?:confused:

No, but if you're in a tense situation where the dog may be likely to attack if you panic, your reactions would dictate what it should do. They sense stress, panic and uncertainty and would defend their owners.

Or if the owner is blind to the dog's actions, because they believe their animal is in the right, that too can be picked up from the owner; another subtle cue. This would come from, for example, inconsistent discipline.

Dogs need the same set of rules, or something snaps inside.

Even if you don't mean to, you can influence its behaviour with your own if you don't correct bad or unwanted behaviour.

Now, I don't mean "you" as in you specifically Smunkee, I'm using it loosely here.

I'm only paraphrasing what I've been told.

Those were scrapes, not an actual life or death attack. But tell me, what would you do if your dog for no reason attacked someone with the intent to kill?

I'd be legally required to put it down even if the person deserved it

I've already pointed out that a dog won't attack a group of 5 humans even if they where children

...which is a stupid assertion. If the dogs were acting aggressively towards the children, the children were most likely afraid - something that the dogs could have sensed. It would not be at all surprising for an overly aggressive dog to attack a child if that child and the others were terrified.

and now I will point out that people/monkeys/lion cub have been known to do the same thing rare as it is just look at a group of children picking on a weaker member

Do those children usually attempt to kill the "weaker member"?

Even fights between pack members of social animals rarely end in death. Wolf packs actually include an omega that the others relentlessly pick on. But if one of the animals seriously injures the omega, he'll have the alpha to deal with.

I've already pointed out that a dog won't attack a group of 5 humans even if they where children
You underestimate dogs, and especially poorly socialized, fighting dogs.

I've already pointed out that a dog won't attack a group of 5 humans even if they where children

and now I will point out that people/monkeys/lion cub have been known to do the same thing rare as it is just look at a group of children picking on a weaker member

Nope, wrong. I watched a rotwieler attempt to attack a group of 4 children playing. Each one was taller than he was, and one was my brother. My own dog broke his chain and intercepted the rot, all he did was grab him by the throat and hold until one of us got there and told him to let loose. The dog was amongrel, half the zie of the rot, and not trained as any kind of attack or guard dog, it was simply because we had taught the dog right.

It was funny when the Rots owner treid to sue because my dog 'ruined' his dog (which was put down).

No, but if you're in a tense situation where the dog may be likely to attack if you panic, your reactions would dictate what it should do. They sense stress, panic and uncertainty and would defend their owners.

Or if the owner is blind to the dog's actions, because they believe their animal is in the right, that too can be picked up from the owner; another subtle cue. This would come from, for example, inconsistent discipline.

Dogs need the same set of rules, or something snaps inside.

Even if you don't mean to, you can influence its behaviour with your own if you don't correct bad or unwanted behaviour.

Now, I don't mean "you" as in you specifically Smunkee, I'm using it loosely here.

I'm only paraphrasing what I've been told.
interesting.

once when I took Buddy to Petsmart we were in line for the check-out and this guy next to me had a cat on a leash and he was on his cell phone and he kept cussing and it was starting to piss me off, and my dog pee'd on his cat.......I suppose that's my fault? ;) Anyway, the man kicked my dog and my dog snapped at him and Petsmart called 911.....my dog didn't even try to bite him, he just snapped to let him know "hey don't kick me"

interesting.

once when I took Buddy to Petsmart we were in line for the check-out and this guy next to me had a cat on a leash and he was on his cell phone and he kept cussing and it was starting to piss me off, and my dog pee'd on his cat.......I suppose that's my fault? ;) Anyway, the man kicked my dog and my dog snapped at him and Petsmart called 911.....my dog didn't even try to bite him, he just snapped to let him know "hey don't kick me"
Haha, the dog peed on his cast. Fuckin' hilarious.

It would not be at all surprising for an overly aggressive dog to attack a child if that child and the others were terrified.

okay I'll give you an example:

a) 1 person
b) a group of 5

now if either went up to you what would have you most worried?

Do those children usually attempt to kill the "weaker member"?

lets look at human history shall we 'when a group of people single out members for being witches and such what usually happens to them?'

okay I'll give you an example:

a) 1 person
b) a group of 5

now if either went up to you what would have you most worried?

As a general rule, I wouldn't be worried about either - people or dogs. If either was acting aggressively, however.....

lets look at human history shall we 'when a group of people single out members for being witches and such what usually happens to them?'

Irrelevant. I don't think these two dogs were under the impression that the terrier was breaking some religious code or poisoning the crops.

Irrelevant. I don't think these two dogs were under the impression that the terrier was breaking some religious code or poisoning the crops.

your missing the point people will gang up against people for no reason at all (though there is often reason put in later) and when this happens it doesn't end well

interesting.

once when I took Buddy to Petsmart we were in line for the check-out and this guy next to me had a cat on a leash and he was on his cell phone and he kept cussing and it was starting to piss me off, and my dog pee'd on his cat.......I suppose that's my fault? ;) Anyway, the man kicked my dog and my dog snapped at him and Petsmart called 911.....my dog didn't even try to bite him, he just snapped to let him know "hey don't kick me"

I think your dog really was reacting to your emotions. When my grams was near the end of her life she was kinda bipolar-like in her moods. I'd be talking to her normally and everything would be great; I'd say something that apparently upset her and then I'd see a dark heavy mood appear in her face and her dog would immediately start barking at me (without her saying anything or the dog looking at her for a visual cue). I'd know she was upset from her look and then the dog barking but it was always confirmed by her starting to yell at me for whatever it was. That always tripped me out.

As a general rule, I wouldn't be worried about either - people or dogs. If either was acting aggressively, however.....



Irrelevant. I don't think these two dogs were under the impression that the terrier was breaking some religious code or poisoning the crops.

gang turf wars
robberies
racism
life insurance money
affairs

there are lots of reasons people kill people. Look at American history. People have been murdered for being born the wrong color. Hell, the Holocaust happened because one group of people, the Nazis, hated another group of people, the nonaryans. Nazis would have come up sooner or later. Better Hitler and his Nazis enter the debate in something that's not a logical fallacy.

Dogs are one of the closest animals to humans. Look at wolves, which are just wild dogs that haven't been breed. Social hierarchy that can be as unstable as human heirarchies. Pack wars, which are a big problem in Yellowstone. You have a weak member, the Omega, that's mistreated yet still gets certain benefits, like group hunts and food. It feels like something's eating my brain, so I'll stop typing now.

your missing the point people will gang up against people for no reason at all (though there is often reason put in later) and when this happens it doesn't end well

I have yet to see people gang up on people for no reason at all. Once a fight does start, mob mentality can set in, but there generally has to be already be a fight.

In this case, we are talking about aggressive dogs that started a fight. Aggressive dogs are most often the product of inattentive or abusive owners - people who can't be bothered to ensure that their animals have been properly socialized.

there are lots of reasons people kill people.

I never claimed otherwise. What's your point?

Who gives a fuck? We are talking about aggressive dogs and supposed aggressive breeds here.

Who gives a fuck? We are talking about aggressive dogs and supposed aggressive breeds here.

I don't really believe in "aggressive breeds" with the possible exception of actual wolves - which tend to have more of the instinctual aggression. There are breeds that may need more attention in order to properly train them, but I don't think there are any "aggressive breeds".

your missing the point people will gang up against people for no reason at all (though there is often reason put in later) and when this happens it doesn't end well

You are dramatically over-anthropomorphizing this. Dogs can't fight for the same reasons people do because dogs are not people. They fight for three basic reasons: they're scared, they're hungry, or they're pissed. The fact that the dogs didn't exhibit standard fear reactions; they didn't pee, they didn't stand off, they didn't put their ears down and cower, etc., suggests they weren't afraid. The fact that they mauled rather than ate the Jack Russell suggests they weren't hungry. That leaves the final option: because of training and conditioning, they were spoiling for a fight.

Now I don't know where you got this idea in your head that a dog won't attack anything taller than itself--by that logic, wolves would never attack deer, and no amount of training would ever get, say, an Airedale to attack a bear, which is just absurd and contrary to just about everything I've ever seen in dogs proper to say nothing of aggressive dogs, of which I've seen many. Aggressive dogs will attack those things that look ripe for attacking, and a terrified five year old exudes ripe for attacking.

And to be honest, yes, I do think the owners should be punished, because either they didn't train their animals very well, or as seems more likely, they deliberately trained them to be aggressive, and this attack was a direct consequence of that.

interesting.

once when I took Buddy to Petsmart we were in line for the check-out and this guy next to me had a cat on a leash and he was on his cell phone and he kept cussing and it was starting to piss me off, and my dog pee'd on his cat.......I suppose that's my fault? ;) Anyway, the man kicked my dog and my dog snapped at him and Petsmart called 911.....my dog didn't even try to bite him, he just snapped to let him know "hey don't kick me"

Even if it isn't your fault, your dog is picking up on sub-conscious cues. You thought that this yammering plethora of jackassory was being a grade-A asshole, so your dog picked up on that and figured that the cat was one in the same and did what you wanted to do but didn't because of that little nagging voice in the back of your head that screams at you for having irrational thoughts. :D

I live in New Zealand and I'm sorry to say that dog attacks are pretty much in the news everyday. Just last week a eldely women was attack on the street by a pitbull I think and she died. A couple of years ago, a 6 year old girl was attacked so badly to the head and face that she lost alot of blood and is still having plastic op's. I have been atacked but my one was just a bite to the leg. I told the council and they wouldn't do anything about it. I agree that its the owners fault but sometimes, its the dog, not the owner. I say kill all dogs and just have cats!!

Some days I wish we could go back the the "old west" justice. The world would be a far safer place. Although I think the boot hill cemetery would be overflowing.

I live in New Zealand and I'm sorry to say that dog attacks are pretty much in the news everyday. Just last week a eldely women was attack on the street by a pitbull I think and she died. A couple of years ago, a 6 year old girl was attacked so badly to the head and face that she lost alot of blood and is still having plastic op's. I have been atacked but my one was just a bite to the leg. I told the council and they wouldn't do anything about it. I agree that its the owners fault but sometimes, its the dog, not the owner. I say kill all dogs and just have cats!!

I've been scratched by cats. Kill them all and just have dogs.
(BTW I am owned by a calico.)

I live in New Zealand and I'm sorry to say that dog attacks are pretty much in the news everyday. Just last week a eldely women was attack on the street by a pitbull I think and she died. A couple of years ago, a 6 year old girl was attacked so badly to the head and face that she lost alot of blood and is still having plastic op's. I have been atacked but my one was just a bite to the leg. I told the council and they wouldn't do anything about it. I agree that its the owners fault but sometimes, its the dog, not the owner. I say kill all dogs and just have cats!!

It is extremely rare for a dog to be aggressive or vicious if it has received proper care. It is almost always the owner who is truly at fault when a dog harms someone.

It is extremely rare for a dog to be aggressive or vicious if it has received proper care. It is almost always the owner who is truly at fault when a dog harms someone.

Yes that is true in some part but remember who their closest counsins are!! Don't forget that they were put on this earth for a reason.

Yes that is true in some part but remember who their closest counsins are!! Don't forget that they were put on this earth for a reason.

are you talking about wolves? because my dog is half wolf and he is quite mellow and nice... apart from pissing on a cat once and then snapping at a grown man who kicked him, he's been a good dog.

I don't really believe in "aggressive breeds" with the possible exception of actual wolves - which tend to have more of the instinctual aggression. There are breeds that may need more attention in order to properly train them, but I don't think there are any "aggressive breeds".

Oh there is....Yorkshire Terriers.

Yes that is true in some part but remember who their closest counsins are!! Don't forget that they were put on this earth for a reason.

Nothing was put on this earth for a reason. Dogs who are oned by responsible people are not a threat. Dogs owned by assholes are. Tire irons, kitchen cutlery, and steel toe boots owned by assholes are just as dangerous. Should we ban those?

You've just been brainwashed by the media's anti-pit bull scare tactics. Before pit bulls became the fashionable scare mongering story it was the Doberman, now we don't hear about them because the media has picked another canine "killer" to villify.

If you look at the facts pit bulls have better average temperament test results than almost any other dog. Pit bulls are known to be more tolerant of children's roughhousing because of their higher pain tolerance. Shit, pit bulls were the most popular breed of dog in the USA before the fifties. They earned the nickname "nanny dog" because of their loving and protective nature toward kids. It's only recently when assholes started mistreating the dogs to make them more agressive that we started seeing pitbull attacks. Very often those dogs are not even pit bulls, but look-alike breeds such as dogo argentino (pictured below) or mixed breeds that contain some pit bull. The media labels them pit bulls because that name terrifies people and gets them to watch the news or buy the newspaper.

http://i12.tinypic.com/6bu75og.jpgDogo Argentino. If this dog attacks someone the press will label it a pit bull attack because the dogs look similar and the name pit bull sells papers.

http://i17.tinypic.com/664alip.jpgThis is a real pit bull exhibiting typical pit bull behavior.

Yes, depends a lot on the owners, I have known quite mellow, merry and happy pitbulls, rather innoffensive unless provoked badly. Even then, I have a bit amount of bias given a pitbull once mauled so badly a Samoyedo I used to own that we had to put it down.

I have no luck with dogs, my Husky became a roadkill, and my Samoyedo was killed-by-teeth. :(

The problem is not the profile of the pitbulls dogs, but the profile of many (not all, I am not generalizing) pitbull owners, who look specifically for a strong, vicious and aggressive dog, and that end having it by making their pitbulls turn into monsters.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/05/02/hero.dog.ap/index.html

The article mentions that the two pit bulls would probably be destroyed. What about the owners? Destroy them! :mad: nah, not destroyed... spayed and neutered. :D

um...the pit bulls wouldn't of attacked a group of 5 anything especially tall animals like people as shown by the fact that they went for the terrier

2 dogs will gang up on another dog though why it got so bad is beyond me odds are this is a one off the owner is probably innocent beyond having his dogs escape... oh yes they will. especially if those 5+ large creatures are afraid of them. and they went for the terrier because the Terrier showed more aggressive action towards the Pit Bulls.

so it's my fault that my dog is lazy?:confused:nah, your dog is lazy because he sees what you do everyday... he's just tired from watching you.

It is extremely rare for a dog to be aggressive or vicious if it has received proper care. It is almost always the owner who is truly at fault when a dog harms someone.some breeds are aggressive. especially if their parents are aggresive. it has to be "bred out of them." that's why parentage is very important.

while I agree that owners are responsible for their dog's aggressive levels, it's not just the owners that determine how aggressive an animal is.

<snip>

some breeds are aggressive. especially if their parents are aggresive. it has to be "bred out of them." that's why parentage is very important.

while I agree that owners are responsible for their dog's aggressive levels, it's not just the owners that determine how aggressive an animal is.

Pit bulls were bred to fight other dogs. Human agression was bred out of them so they wouldn't attack their handlers. To this day they retain some agression against other dogs and animals, but a well bred, well socialized pit bull will display no human agression.

Hate to nitpick, but the article doesn't mention that the dogs had owners. They could have been strays or escapees. Anyway, yes, they should be put down and the owner(s) (if any) should be warned to keep any dogs they might own in the future on a tight leash. Pun intended.

I've seen my cat get in fights with itself.
QFT.

Hate to nitpick, but the article doesn't mention that the dogs had owners. They could have been strays or escapees. Anyway, yes, they should be put down and the owner(s) (if any) should be warned to keep any dogs they might own in the future on a tight leash. Pun intended.


QFT.

Pit Bulls don't just pop out of the ground. Whether they were escaped or abandoned, someone owned them. *nod*

Hate to nitpick, but the article doesn't mention that the dogs had owners. They could have been strays or escapees. Anyway, yes, they should be put down and the owner(s) (if any) should be warned to keep any dogs they might own in the future on a tight leash. Pun intended.

Wrong. They should be disallowed any dogs in the future. If I know the usual people who buy pit bulls, they bought them because they are tough looking and have an aggressive history and then trained aggressiveness into them and let them loose outside. It is not the dogs' fault, it is the owners' and they should stop getting slaps on the wrist. They should be sent to jail in addition to not being allowed to own dogs.

Pit Bulls don't just pop out of the ground. Whether they were escaped or abandoned, someone owned them. *nod*

How do you know? Where I come from, they grow on trees. <.< >.>

More seriously, if they were abandoned by their owners or escaped they may have used their natural abilities to develop aggressive tendencies; thus, breeding rather than previous ownership should be blamed, unless the dogs were trained to be aggressive under that ownership. But I see your point.

Poor little George...that's the sort of dog that anyone in their right mind would want, not some sort of nitwit pit bull or Connie Corso.

How do you know? Where I come from, they grow on trees. <.< >.>

More seriously, if they were abandoned by their owners or escaped they may have used their natural abilities to develop aggressive tendencies; thus, breeding rather than previous ownership should be blamed, unless the dogs were trained to be aggressive under that ownership. But I see your point.
Escaped or stray dogs don't exactly do cross-country treks. It would have been known that those dogs were in the area and that walking around was probably dangerous.

Pit bulls were bred to fight other dogs. Human agression was bred out of them so they wouldn't attack their handlers. To this day they retain some agression against other dogs and animals, but a well bred, well socialized pit bull will display no human agression.
and I've seen reports here about well cared for pit bulls owned by responsible and caring owners attack people for no good reason. the only common element? the pit bulls were a few generations removed from parents that were used for fighting.

it takes several generations of breeding and careing to remove aggression from animals. Not saying it can't be done, but to assume that a well caring and responsible person is all it takes is just not true. Time is also needed.

another thing not mention, is did those dogs have rabies or any other illness... in fact, did they have owners?

does New Zealand have Licening laws for dogs?

some breeds are aggressive. especially if their parents are aggresive. it has to be "bred out of them." that's why parentage is very important.

Breeds don't have parents. Individual dogs do. Yes, it is possible to pick aggressive animals and breed them for aggression - the people who enter dog fights have been known to do it. But even those animals, with proper training, are usually not aggressive. Aggression tends to have much more to do with training and treatment than with any natural tendencies. You can breed a dog that is naturally more aggressive, but you can generally train the dog to be calmer, as well.

Meanwhile, most of the breeds that people are terrified of - the ones everyone assumes are mean - have not traditionally been bred for aggression. Instead, they've been bred for strength - they are working dogs. But because some owners have specifically trained them to be aggressive (attack/guard dogs) or neglected them until they became aggressive, the breed as a whole has gotten a bad rep. Examples include Dobermans, rotties, german shepherds, and pit bulls. None of these breeds are automatically aggressive - in fact, they are generally very gentle dogs - very slow to anger.

while I agree that owners are responsible for their dog's aggressive levels, it's not just the owners that determine how aggressive an animal is.

No, but it is largely the owners. And an owner who knows he has an aggressive animal - whether it is his fault or not - needs to keep that animal on a very tight leash, as he will be (and should be) held responsible for the actions of the animal.

More seriously, if they were abandoned by their owners or escaped they may have used their natural abilities to develop aggressive tendencies; thus, breeding rather than previous ownership should be blamed, unless the dogs were trained to be aggressive under that ownership. But I see your point.

If aggression was developed because of abandonment or neglect, it is still the owner's fault.

"Destroyed"

"Put down"

"Put to sleep"

All terms designed to cover up the true word that applies to the 'destruction' of animals - murder. 'Destroyed' just makes it sound less morally ambiguous.

"Destroyed"

"Put down"

"Put to sleep"

All terms designed to cover up the true word that applies to the 'destruction' of animals - murder. 'Destroyed' just makes it sound less morally ambiguous.

so what do you suggest? put those dogs on trial (tries to imagine the jury) and send them to the Big Kennel?

"Destroyed"

"Put down"

"Put to sleep"

All terms designed to cover up the true word that applies to the 'destruction' of animals - murder. 'Destroyed' just makes it sound less morally ambiguous.

The vast bulk of society and law would argue that murder only occurs when a human kills another human.

Escaped or stray dogs don't exactly do cross-country treks. It would have been known that those dogs were in the area and that walking around was probably dangerous.

Some do, but it takes years. Haven't you ever heard the stories of the dogs lost while on vacation or something and then found thousands of miles away? Sure, someone might have picked them up for a bit and done some traveling, but a lot of that is probably on foot.


so what do you suggest? put those dogs on trial (tries to imagine the jury) and send them to the Big Kennel?

To be fair, there are people who have dedicated a large portion of their lives to properly training dogs who have been abused or neglected by owners and thus turned aggressive. With a lot of time and patience, they are very often successful and end up with dogs that could make a good pet in just about any home. If someone was willing to take these dogs in and try, I'd give them the chance.

To be fair, there are people who have dedicated a large portion of their lives to properly training dogs who have been abused or neglected by owners and thus turned aggressive. With a lot of time and patience, they are very often successful and end up with dogs that could make a good pet in just about any home. If someone was willing to take these dogs in and try, I'd give them the chance.
while that is a grand idea (really). and the fee for such training could be tagged onto the punishment levied on the owners. what's stopping the owners of undoing the training through their stupidity and carelessness when they get their dogs back? or if the owners pick up other dogs?

perhaps a register like those that supposed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerious people?

hmmm...

while that is a grand idea (really). and the fee for such training could be tagged onto the punishment levied on the owners. what's stopping the owners of undoing the training through their stupidity and carelessness when they get their dogs back? or if the owners pick up other dogs?

The owners should not get their dogs back or be allowed any other dogs.

perhaps a register like those that supposed to keep guns out of the hands of dangerious people?

hmmm...

Sounds good to me. Perhaps with an appeals system for those people who were simply ignorant, rather than malicious, to get off the registry.

I can't find it, but I read about it on MSN and it said there that the pits had owners who agreed to put the dogs down.

I used to work with dogs and a lot of it was not just bred for aggression but inbred a little to be neurotic. In a bit of irony, the most dangerous dogs we had to face were Shih-tzus and miniature/toy poodles. Most of them were so inbred their wires were just completely messed up and all of them were aggressive. They'd go straight for your face every time when all you're doing is brushing them. A lot of owners had to pop their dogs full of Valium before bringing them in to be groomed. It was great fun.

The pits that came in were family dogs and they were awesome gentle creatures. But, there's a lot of money to be had in dog fighting, unfortunately. Add in a lot of places see dogs as property and not much else, you get things like this going on. Even when they get caught, (at least in the US) a lot of the dog fighters just add in the cost of their fines as part of the cost of doing business and shrug it off. Certain groups are trying to lobby to make it a felony crime instead of a misdemeanor to throw in some jail time on top of the fines, but it's slow going. It's also hard to catch. "I was just walking my dog in the park, officer, and his dog attacked mine. I have no idea what's going on!" etc. It's a real shame.