Why do people keep rottweiler and pitbulls?

hunter164

This is the missus' Rottweiler








And he loves eating Bearded Dragons...

heno86

Discodog wrote: »

I would never allow my dogs to be alone with Cesar Millan !.

not a fan then??

civildefence

We had an english bull terrier and a jack russell sharing a back garden years ago. Both were looked after and treated very well. The little jacker was a dote but the bull terrier would occasionally give me that "don't come near me" look which scared the shyte out of me. Anyway one day the bull terrier attacked the jacker and nearly killed him, I ran out to try and get her off him and she then went for me, had to get rid of her. Thankfully the jack russell survived.

I know a lot of posters are saying its the owner not the pet and i'm sure thats the case the majority of the time but this was an occasion where the dog was in no way encouraged to be vicious but naturally was. I understand that many of you keep these dogs and they are loving pets but i'm afraid i'll always be wary of them after my experience.

arybvtcw0eolkf

civildefence wrote: »

We had an english bull terrier and a jack russell sharing a back garden years ago. Both were looked after and treated very well. The little jacker was a dote but the bull terrier would occasionally give me that "don't come near me" look which scared the shyte out of me. Anyway one day the bull terrier attacked the jacker and nearly killed him, I ran out to try and get her off him and she then went for me, had to get rid of her. Thankfully the jack russell survived.

I know a lot of posters are saying its the owner not the pet and i'm sure thats the case the majority of the time but this was an occasion where the dog was in no way encouraged to be vicious but naturally was. I understand that many of you keep these dogs and they are loving pets but i'm afraid i'll always be wary of them after my experience.

But that sounds like a personality problem in the individual dog & not the breed.

For instance if you search this forum for aggressive breeds the breed which come's up most frequently is the Jack Russell Terrier - but your's was a good natured one, doesn't mean everyone else is wrong!.

Discodog

As I tried to state previously I have been told that the concern with APB's, right or wrong, was that if something pushes them to aggression they won't break off & can cause a lot of damage.

Pack behaviour evolved so that no dogs would get killed as it would be bad for the pack. We have all experienced dog fights. Provided the dogs are not confined the loser usually runs away & the aggressor stops attacking. I recall that the injuries, from a couple of the incidents that led to the ban in the UK, were horrific. I can remember the doctors being interviewed & they had never seen such injuries from a dog attack.

Something has to be done to prevent hundreds of Staffies being killed. I admired the way that BDH & the Vet bought the issue into the open. I agree that BSL legislation is the wrong answer but I cannot see a right answer. How do you stop the wrong person from getting a dog ?.

The Sweeper

LOL I've joined the ranks. I posted it elsewhere on these forums - I adopted a little bull breed puppy at 12-14 weeks last Friday. Gus is his name (short for Fungus because he's got ringworm.) He's got a gorgeous nature.

The morning after I took him home I brought him to my vet. This pup was emaciated, he'd been crawling with fleas so still had flea bites all over him, has his baldy ringworm patches, but still has a gorgeous nature - he's patient and interested without being full on. I was sitting in the vet waiting room and this bloke stared at the dog, then at me - I looked him in the eye and told him I'd just rescued Gus, and his condition wasn't my fault, but I'd be sure to fix him up so he'd fill out and get better.

The bloke nodded and then asked what breed he is. I explained he's a Bull Arab - they're a bit of a non-breed, originally created by crossing the English Bull Terrier with a greyhound and a German short-haired pointer - so you get something similar to the dogs pictured in sligopark's earlier post, the bull lurchers. The bloke then told me I had a dog that would grow up to be savage (as little emaciated Gus peered up at him interestedly and thumped his tail) and these kinds of dogs bred for killing could never be trusted.

Even the vet nurse on reception said to him "Well I hardly think he looks capable of killing anything right now, don't you think?"

The vet loves Bull Arab dogs - she's from an area of Queensland where there is lots of pig hunting, and she said if they're never trained to hunt but rather are well socialised and brought up to be friendly dogs, they're fantastic pets. We then proceeded to have a joke about how Gus was fighting fleas, ringworm, neglect, underfeeding AND prejudice, and she charged me the price of a worm tablet for the entire consult - where while she'd cleaned the tarry gunk out of his ears, he had dutifully washed whatever part of her hands and arms he could reach.

Freddie59

IvySlayer wrote: »

There are no bad dogs, only bad owners.

In a nutshell. Not currently a dog owner, but we had a Yorkie for 11 years and were warned about their snappy nature. Dogs are what you make them. They're no different to children - you have to teach them right from wrong.

We had a problem neighbour with a German Shepherd. Typical small man syndrome. 'The dog's hard - so I'm hard'.

Unfortunately, if Staffies and PBs are left to their own devices the damage will be far far greater than, say, a Yorkie if they attack. Thus people's justifiable fear.

And in all fairness the attacks portrayed in the media (and let's face it - these aren't made up) are what terrify people.

lrushe

civildefence wrote: »

We had an english bull terrier and a jack russell sharing a back garden years ago. Both were looked after and treated very well. The little jacker was a dote but the bull terrier would occasionally give me that "don't come near me" look which scared the shyte out of me. Anyway one day the bull terrier attacked the jacker and nearly killed him, I ran out to try and get her off him and she then went for me, had to get rid of her. Thankfully the jack russell survived.

Had the exact same thing happen a few years ago, only replace Bull Terrier with Wire Haired Fox Terrier, tore the JRT's ears to shreads. Like someone said it was a personality thing, they just didn't get on. That JRT was part Pit Bull, didn't stop him getting beaten up though!

Freddie59

Beckham Rhythmic Party wrote: »

But that sounds like a personality problem in the individual dog & not the breed.

it does. But it will not lessen the effects of an attack. in fairness, any of the large breeds can be like this, and their physical strength is the problem if they attack.

A friend of mine has a boxer, and his wife fell in the yard one day, damaging her knee. My friend and his son went to help, but the dog thought they were going to harm her.

A standoff ensued for 15 minutes before he'd let them near her. And the owner's and experienced owner of this breed, having had several of them.

lrushe

Freddie59 wrote: »

And in all fairness the attacks portrayed in the media (and let's face it - these aren't made up) are what terrify people.

And that's were you're wrong, here's one example:

Which is Aggression? Which is Big News?

“Pit Bull Eats Toes off Infant”
“Baby has Toes Chewed off by Pit Bull”
“Pit bull Eats Infant’s Toes”
“Pit Bull Chews Off Infant’s Toes”

These are but a few of the 225 news articles covering an incident of a 4-month-old child’s toes being chewed off by a “pit bull.”
The screeching headlines of Pit bull Eating Toes off Infant creates yet another false imagery that re-enforces negative perceptions about this breed/type of dog. Clearly, these types of headlines contribute to the all too pervasive, yet inaccurate perception that: Pit bull + infant = aggression / injury
In reality, this case has nothing to do with “pit bulls” or with “aggression.” This is a case of human neglect and puppy behaviors (chewing).

The facts are as follows:

The Onslow County Sheriff’s Office said that the child’s mother and her boyfriend are facing felony child abuse charges after a pit bull puppy chewed off all the toes on a four-month-old child’s left foot early Monday morning.
Authorities say the child’s mother, Robie Lynn Jenkins, and her boyfriend, Tremayne J. Spillman, were dog-sitting a 12-week-old pit bull for Aaron Watkins, who was arrested Sunday for possession of a firearm by a felon.
The sheriff’s department says Jenkins placed the baby on a foldout couch in the living room while she and Spillman slept on another couch. Two other children were in a bedroom while the dog was allowed to move throughout the house, according to the sheriff.
Jenkins told authorities she had taken medication, and even though she was sleeping in the same room as the infant, she never heard the child cry out. She discovered what had happened in the morning when she went to change the child’s diaper.
Chewing is a behavior exhibited by many dogs, but especially by puppies. As many puppy owners can testify to, puppies, can and will, chew an amazing assortment of objects, oblivious and irrespective of the value these objects may have to their owner. This is NOT aggressive behavior, nor is it an indictor of “breed behavior.”
While extremely rare for puppies to inflict these kinds of injuries on humans, it is well documented that numerous different breeds have been involved in this type of behavior (i.e, inflicting chewing injuries on long-unattended infants or incapacitated adults).

lrushe

Freddie59 wrote: »

And in all fairness the attacks portrayed in the media (and let's face it - these aren't made up) are what terrify people.

Few more facts:

Tranceypoo

Freddie59 wrote: »

And in all fairness the attacks portrayed in the media (and let's face it - these aren't made up) are what terrify people.

Oh yes, everything you read/hear in the media is 100% true, they never lie/misquote/glorify stories :mad:

andreac

hunter164 wrote: »

This is the missus' Rottweiler








And he loves eating Bearded Dragons...

Beautiful dog, do you know his breeding? Hes fab!!!:D

duracell_bunny

I love this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZht--MW2D0

Freddie59

Tranceypoo wrote: »

Oh yes, everything you read/hear in the media is 100% true, they never lie/misquote/glorify stories :mad:

Look - I'm a dog lover/admirer; always have been. But, much as the same as some humans are ignorant, offensive, troublemaking morons, so are some dogs and their owners. And people trump animals. That's the way it is. Period.

Are THESE made up:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5AT23E20091130 (and that's Reuters)

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/arrest-as-dog-kills-baby-in-uk-454304.html

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/girl-killed-dog-attack-crawley-uk-uncle-ursan-ahmed-arrested

It is puzzling - to say the least - how some people are prepared to defend this. Takes all types I suppose.

lrushe

Freddie59 wrote: »

It is puzzling - to say the least - how some people are prepared to defend this. Takes all types I suppose.

What people are defending is the fact that it is not just RBs that are dangerous to people in the wrong hands, any large breed dog can inflict terrible injuries or kill but the media only sensationalise certain breeds. Almost every breed of dog has bitten or killed people but the media and 'joe public' are only interested in hearing about a select few.
Also the media have been guilty of misidentifying breeds in almost all the articles you've quoted the dog was a 'Mastiff Type', that could be almost any dog, so many breeds resemble a Mastiff.

See attached:
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/breed-identification/

Tranceypoo

He looks particularly savage with his party hat on

ETA this was a comment on the Rottie pics!!

Tranceypoo

lrushe wrote: »

What people are defending is the fact that it is not just RBs that are dangerous to people in the wrong hands, any large breed dog can inflict terrible injuries or kill but the media only sensationalise certain breeds. Almost every breed of dog has bitten or killed people but the media and 'joe public' are only interested in hearing about a select few.
Also the media have been guilty of misidentifying breeds in almost all the articles you've quoted the dog was a 'Mastiff Type', that could be almost any dog, so many breeds resemble a Mastiff.

See attached:
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/breed-identification/

Thanks Irush, that's what I wanted to say!

helen.ryan3

i dont have a rottweiler or pitbull but i no a good few people who do and they are lovely dog's, any dog is going to turn if its not well looked after so dont just put in on the big dogs

Mr. Presentable

They are no more likely to bite than any other breed, the problem arises from the fact that when they do attack it is:

a) Usually for the first time, so the owner thinks they have a kitten!
b) Likely to lead to more severe injuries or fatality than if attacked by, say, a spaniel

seamus

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

They are no more likely to bite than any other breed, the problem arises from the fact that when they do attack it is:

a) Usually for the first time, so the owner thinks they have a kitten!
b) Likely to lead to more severe injuries or fatality than if attacked by, say, a spaniel

Look, we've been through this before. There are fifty other large breeds for whom this statement is equally true, and none of them appear on the restricted breeds list. So the claim about "more severe damage" is complete nonsense and is a poor attempt by people to justify a law *after* it's been enacted.

And I wouldn't write off Spaniels in particular, but any other small breeds, Poms, Yorkies, whatever you like are equally capable of inflicting severe lacerations as any other dog.

Mr. Presentable

Sure, but the OP specifies two breeds.

The stats are for the USA up to 1998. And, yes, I am aware there is no accounting for owners etc.

antomagoo

the circumstances in which these attacks have taken place are never included in the statistics and they have a huge relevance

lisar201

antomagoo wrote: »

the circumstances in which these attacks have taken place are never included in the statistics and they have a huge relevance

exactly it never says whether or not the dog was prevoaked

Freddie59

lrushe wrote: »

What people are defending is the fact that it is not just RBs that are dangerous to people in the wrong hands, any large breed dog can inflict terrible injuries or kill but the media only sensationalise certain breeds. Almost every breed of dog has bitten or killed people but the media and 'joe public' are only interested in hearing about a select few.
Also the media have been guilty of misidentifying breeds in almost all the articles you've quoted the dog was a 'Mastiff Type', that could be almost any dog, so many breeds resemble a Mastiff.

See attached:
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/dog-bites/dog-bites-and-the-media/breed-identification/

You see, the problem I have with this thread is the continued use of the word 'sensationalise' by some posters when trying to defend the mauling/killing of children. There cannot - ever - be justification of this.

You say sensationalise. What some are doing here is to trivialise. And therein lies the problem.

adser53

Freddie59 wrote: »

You see, the problem I have with this thread is the continued use of the word 'sensationalise' by some posters when trying to defend the mauling/killing of children. There cannot - ever - be justification of this.

You say sensationalise. What some are doing here is to trivialise. And therein lies the problem.

Personally I think you're missing the point. there is nothing more horrific or sad than the death or
injury of a child. but there's a big difference in the incident and the media coverage in most of these cases. plus the fact the media only reports on incidents involving a handful of breeds and always adds BS to the article

hunter164

andreac wrote: »

Beautiful dog, do you know his breeding? Hes fab!!!:D

I honestly couldn't tell you sorry.

Tranceypoo wrote: »

He looks particularly savage with his party hat on

ETA this was a comment on the Rottie pics!!

If you think he's bad there you should see him with his skateboard

arybvtcw0eolkf

Freddie59 wrote: »

You see, the problem I have with this thread is the continued use of the word 'sensationalise' by some posters when trying to defend the mauling/killing of children. There cannot - ever - be justification of this.

You say sensationalise. What some are doing here is to trivialise. And therein lies the problem.

I searched the thread.

You used the word twice, and Irushe used it once, I can't find reference to it from anyone else!.

lrushe

Mr. Presentable wrote: »

Sure, but the OP specifies two breeds.

The stats are for the USA up to 1998. And, yes, I am aware there is no accounting for owners etc.

Freddie59 wrote: »

You see, the problem I have with this thread is the continued use of the word 'sensationalise' by some posters when trying to defend the mauling/killing of children. There cannot - ever - be justification of this.

You say sensationalise. What some are doing here is to trivialise. And therein lies the problem.

Did you have a look at the link I posted, how can the stats and media coverage be trusted when they can't even get a v.fundamental piece of information ie. breed correct.
Nobody is belittling the killing of a human being, what people are trying to get to get across is that any dog can bite or kill, no breeds track record is clear on that score. Also where a breed is named in the media the media quiet often gets the breed wrong whether through ignorance or a blatant attempt to sell newspapers.

cyrusdvirus

Just read about what these vicious Pit Bulls did...

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/24466747/detail.html