Damn, I had another whole snarky reply to Sal Ammoniac that you just wasted, kambuckta. When I previewed & saw your post, mine just didn’t work any more. Darn you!
Your latest is a whole different kettle of fish. I can agree wholeheartedly with those sentiments.
I’ve seen lots of dogs that should be (at least) removed from their incompetent owners and/or (at worst) put down. IME, small dogs are the worst because they’re “so cute” and “couldn’t possibly hurt you”. IMO, it should be a LOT more difficult to acquire/own a pet, and owners should be a lot more accountable, but I’m not holding my breath on that. Don’t even get me started on breeding. :rolleyes:
I have to disagree with this. “Show quality bloodlines” are normally a very GOOD thing. These dogs have come from responsible breeders that care not only about the way the dog looks, but also about temperament. The puppies are quite often temperament tested at between 7 and 8 weeks, and matched personality wise with perspective buyers.
The dogs with the most questionable temperraments are the ones that come from puppy mills and backyard breeders who don’t look any farther than “Oh look… Fluffy’s in heat…there is a male that looks JUST like her down the block, let’s put them together and make puppies!”
Never mind that Fluffy’s suitor will bite his owner if they pet him while he’s eating.
Umm, no, it wasn’t a reasonable reponse because I mistook this for a Pit. Sorry about that. It’s not unreasonable in any other way. If you tell me I, or anybody I care about, have to be killed if they merely demonstrate aggression verbally and with body language, I have a problem with you. Not only do I find such an attitude confrontational, but also despicable, as such if there was even an attempt to carry out such a threat against me or anybody I care about, I would do everything within my power to stop it and retaliate punitively with greater force.
OK, then, at what point (if any) would you call for a dog displaying aggressive tendencies to be culled? Should the decision always be up to the owner? Would you acknowledge that some owners are so one-eyed about their pets that they lack the objectivity necessary to make that decision?
I assume you’re using “cull” as a nice little euphemism for “end life of”. Same as with humans. Prove pre-meditated first-degree homicide and competence to stand trial and assist in it’s own defense, and after the appropriate appeal process you can kill the dog
As I said in the pit thread, I don’t want my dogs to bite ever. I don’t care if it’s a child playing too rough, an intruder in my house, or whatever. I don’t trust my dog’s judgement to tell a genuine intruder from a neighbor I’ve asked to drop by and pick up something I forgot at home or someone taunting the dog from a vet performing an unpleasant procedure.
So I socialize the hell out of my dogs, set up situations to train them not to be aggressive (removing their food bowls while they’re eating, inviting children to run at them, etc). The second a dog so much as growls a bit or bears teeth, they are corrected and learn that is not acceptable.
All that said, it’s only the best I can do. I have no guarantee my dogs won’t ever bite when provoked. I can only try my hardest to prevent it. I don’t agree that a god who bites or snarls one time should be put down. It’s not something I’d want a dog to do, but dogs are animals and will sometimes act unpredictably.
Certainly, as mentioned, a dog who seeks out opportunities to bite or cannot be trained out of biting behavior over things like food protection should be put down or extreme measures taken to avoid any situations that could lead to a bite.
I don’t think the pit thread OP’s dog falls into either of those categories. These sound like normal dogs who were adequately contained and provoked. While I wouldn’t want my dogs to ever do that and would probably try to train out that propensity, there’s never a guarantee.
While it was a whoosh, I still don’t agree with destroying dogs for merely biting or displaying aggression much like I don’t agree with destorying children or mentally disabled. I don’t know how to handle these problems, the best I can say is - stay away from dogs if you don’t want to be bitten.
Last time I checked, there’s a rule about threatening fellow posters with violence. Even if you were in the Pit, you’d still be in violation of that rule.
I apologize if it was perceived as a threat. It was a statement to the tune of
1: “If a member of your family verbally expresses aggression towards somebody, they should be put to death.”
2: “I find that statement to be a verbal expression of aggression towards a member of my family, as such applying your own logic, you should be put to death.”
I don’t know whether to laugh or just groan with despair now.
I s’pose I should have expected some nutjobs to crawl out of the woodwork given the subject of the thread. I just didn’t think they’d be quite this, um, interesting.
I’ll try one more time, 'cos I’m curious now.
groman, are there any circumstances that you could envisage where you made a decision to have your pet destroyed because of their aggressive behaviour?
I would apply the same standard as having my child, significant other, sibling or parent destroyed because of their aggressive behaviour. So pretty much only immediate defense of myself or others.
If my kid bit somebody, I’m sure as hell not euthanizing my kid. However, if my kid is lunging at somebody about to kill them, I will do everything in my power to stop him, up to and including lethal force if necessary.
If my friend bit somebody, I’m sure as hell not going to lobby to have them killed. However, if my friend is lunging at somebody about to kill them, I will do everything in my power to stop him, up to and including lethal force if necessary.
Extending the same principle…
If my dog bit somebody, I’m sure as hell not going to have it put down. However, if my dog is lunging at somebody about to kill them, I will do everything in my power to stop it, up to and including lehtal force if necessary.
However, if the kid, dog or friend ALREADY killed somebody, the kid and dog cannot stand trial and assist in their own defense properly, so I would not support the death penalty. For an adult, able-minded friend, I’m still somewhat undecided on the issue, but at the very least you better have proof of premeditation.
You may be able to tell from my user name that I am fond of, and very familiar with dogs. Kambuckta, you may have forgotten (or not known) that there are those of us who are responsible and qualified to manage the life and interactions of a “questionable” dog.
I had a dog rescued from a breeder. She was a high-stung breed, and was never socialized. By the time I got her, she had some pretty strong fears - strangers being her worst. She would occasionally “snap” when frightened. I will say, though, that she had remarkable bite inhibition - she never once connected with anyone.
For the rest of her life, she never met a child. She was never out in the yard by herself. She had supervised interactions with dog-savvy people, and ended up learning agility, herding and obedience work, although she never competed. She had as happy a life as we could give her, and she loved us right back. Many of my dog-training friends got to liking her, and she taught us all a lesson in patience and consistancy.
In the wrong hands, yes, she would have been a dangerous dog. And she would never, ever be able to be rehomed. But, if I was willing to manage her, why should she have been put down?
I am quite partial to the idea that you should have to have a license to own a dog, however…
And on the topic of not letting a dog snarl - be careful with correcting a warning behavior in a dog. Without realizing it, you can teach the dog to escalate aggressive behavior WITHOUT giving a warning. If you are worried about aggressive behavior from any dog, please seek a qualified behaviorist/trainer. Most vet schools can recommend one.
NO, you have it exactly backwards! If you own an animal it is your responsibility to
ensure that it doesn’t cause harm, not my responsibility to avoid it.
To seriously compare treating dangerous animals w/ human criminals is ridiculous, I
understand the bond that can develop between animals and humans, but to ever
compare the value of an animals life w/ that of a human is just not realistic.
I think the OP goes a bit too far, at least in the way the views were expressed, but I
generally agree. Am I going to euthanize my pet the first time it demonstrates agressive
behavior? No, unless the incident is very serious, but if the animal repeats the behavior,
then I would have to say yes, I would seriously consider putting it down.
If you have a dog that snaps at a child because the child messes w/ it’s food, or pulls
it’s ears, the responsibility is all yours for allowing the dog to be in the presence of the
child. Even if you install a 12 ft. chain link fence around your property, topped by
concertina wire, and a kid manages to get past it to retrieve his baseball, only to be
killed by your guard dog, you are ultimately responsible. You may convince a jury that
you took every reasonable precaution, but the kid is still dead and you allowed the
vicious dog to be there.
Get things in perspective, animals are not human and human laws and ethics do not
apply to them.
