Pacific Salt saves my dog from being mauled to death...

It isn't nature vs. nurture, it's nature and nurture.
you could train a pitbull or rottweiler perfectly, and there is still a chance it could attack another dog or human unprovoked.
How many other breeds would do that? Maybe a few of these other "noble" fighting dogs.
This is a fact and I still can't see why you would want to own one unless you are a drug dealer or keep a muzzle on it whenever it's out of the house.
Jill, can you guarantee 100% your pit bull would never attack anyone unprovoked? Would you post it here if it happened tomorrow?

I think you know very little about dogs and probably don't care to learn. Someone with your way of thinking certainly doesn't need a dog. About all you "know" is what you read in the paper or hear on the news. Yes my dog will never attack anything because I see to it she's under control at all times and I know how to handle dogs. There's way too many people like you in the world that know little and talk a lot. I suggest you watch the show "Dog Whisperer" and see where your media myths stand with people that know better. Maybe if you bother to learn the facts about dogs you will realize that it's people that own the dog that are at fault and not entire "breeds". Then again maybe you'd just as soon act like you already know everything because you read it in the paper or saw it on the evening news. So that makes you an "expert". Funny thing my family lives out in the country and we always had Pit Bulls and other breeds you would lump together as being dangerous. They never attacked anyone or bothered any stock. It's all in being a dog person and having the know how to handle dogs. If you can't be bothered with it then no you shouldn't own a dog. But then you seem one of those people that thinks there should be 100% guarantees in this world so maybe we should all turn in our knives, firearms as well as all large dogs because we have no 100% guarantee our neighbor won't go down to the local Mcdonalds with his pack of Pit/rotts and a car load of sharp knives and guns start sicing dogs and cutting/shooting people. No dude we have no 100% guarantees in this world that stupid people won't go nuts and misuse the things we wouldn't do we? So we as Americans choose to allow ownership of things other countries ban and deal with the ones that misuse them. And yes I can be a responsible dog owner just as I can be a responsible firearms/knife owner. I can't speak for my fellow citizen, but I can myself. (BTW maybe you think we should follow England's lead and ban all dogs that may be a threat, ban all firearms and make most all knives illegal as well. They have tryed to give people their 100% guarantees so you can't legally carry a knife over there, or have one that locks open. Firearms are out of the question, while they was going about it they banned a lot of dogs just on breed alone. I guess that's your sort of place to live isn't it?:barf: )
 
Lethal Star Trek blade seized in knives amnesty
Last updated at 10:10am on 25th May 2006




Force for evil: inspector Mac McGarry with the blade, believed to be a lethal Star Trek replica




This horrifying five-foot weapon has been recovered by police during a knife amnesty.

The three-handled sword with a blade at either end, designed to be swung like a paddle, shocked officers who took custody of it.

Photos: See more knives from the amnesty


They are using it to publicise a five-week amnesty during which they hope around 30,000 weapons will be handed in, mainly from youngsters.

A spokesman for police in Gloucester, where it was surrendered, said: "It is a particularly nasty weapon that can, literally, take someone's head off. We are very glad it is off the streets and we want more weapons handed in."

The blade is believed to be a stainless-steel copy of a Klingon weapon used in the science fiction series Star Trek. "It's an extremely dangerous weapon," said a martial arts expert last night.

Other blades surrendered so far include lock-blade flick knives, exotic swords and a 'swordfish jaw' weapon with razor-sharp teeth.

The Home Office amnesty is in response to a series of attacks in recent weeks which have claimed the lives of volunteer policewoman Nisha Patel-Nasri and 15-year-old schoolboy Kiyan Prince. Safety campaigners and police say it does not go far enough. They are demanding far tougher sentences than the current maximum of two years for carrying a knife.

Under pressure in the Commons yesterday, the Prime Minister said a minimum could be introduced because at present thugs can escape with only a caution.

Mr Blair said: "We are giving urgent consideration not just to banning a whole series of knives but also making sure that there is some minimum sentence."

The widow of murdered headteacher Philip Lawrence said yesterday the amnesty on its own will not work.

Frances Lawrence, whose husband was killed at the gates of his school in north London in 1995, said three different ministers have been in charge of crime in the past three weeks and information from the Home Office is confusing.

Mrs Lawrence said: "There is an anomaly between the legislation for knife crime and gun crime, where gun crime carries much stiffer penalties.

"We all know a knife can kill just as easily as a gun so there is a great anomaly there. A knife amnesty on its own won't be a solution."
 
Dangerous dogs - a worldwide issue

by Verite Reily Collins

An update on the status of breed bans in Germany and worldwide




"It boggles the mind" says Rita Benner from Germany, on the latest news concerning German Breed Specific Laws (BSL).

Those of you who met Rita on the DOMINO stand at Crufts will be delighted to hear that High Courts in Schleswig Holstein and Niedersachsen have declared BSL null and void. However, there is a sting in the tail. Judges said it was illegal to single out certain breeds without taking into account dogs of similar size, weight and aggression potential. So wouldn't you know it – politicians have decided in the name of equality to include breeds such as GSDs, which were originally excluded.

"At first I thought this was a terrible decision", says Rita, "but then I started to laugh. Can you imagine how many more people would be active campaigners if the GSD would be included?" This might make the German Kennel Club more active.

Meanwhile, is it 'out of sight – out of mind?' asks our Kennel Club's Staffordshire Bull Terrier Liaison Officer David Levy. "Doubtless the German politicians are hoping that the British and world public will eventually forget about their persecution of dog owners and their pets". The German proposal to the EU for anti-dog legislation across Europe is still on the table and probably won't change, whatever happens at home.

Recently pro-dog campaigners could have received a set-back with the recent tragic death of an eleven year old girl from Lutzhorn, Hamburg, killed by a GSD. Dog World carried the story, which seems to have had more attention in Britain than in Germany. Every accident is tragic, and one would wish it never happened at all. But the very fact that is was considered newsworthy shows how infrequently this type of incident occurs.

The DOMINO campaign
In Britain the Kennel Club's DOMINO campaign to alert dog owners is gathering momentum, and at Petplanet.co.uk we are receiving requests from Veterinary Surgeries asking what they can do to inform owners. As a result, we have worked with the DOMINO campaign to create a simple poster, laying out the facts and what you can do to help. As we go to press, the poster is going into production, so watch this space for details on how to obtain a copy!

Veterinary Nurses have said they are keen to help as many remember when the Dangerous Dogs Act came in to force here in the UK. One told me "I particularly remember one bitch whose owner had been harassed (stones thrown, threats to harm the dog) to the point where her owner had her put down because he couldn't rehome her somewhere safer, and he was afraid to leave her alone in the house. The dog licked my hand through her muzzle as the needle went in and by the time it was over everyone concerned was in tears at the loss of such a bonnie dog."

So alert everyone you know to act. As Levy says, "DOMINO Dogs by its very name aims to point out that unchecked, these laws could spread from breed to breed and country to country. We have already seen German states looking to add further breeds to their banned lists, and many other countries considering, if not following, the German lead."

"It is vital all dog owners continue to campaign directly to our own politicians, European commissioners and German authorities to ensure that the true value of dog companionship is recognised. Any laws to control dangerous animals (must be) based solely on the behaviour of dogs and their owners and not merely the colour of their skin or shape of their skull."

What’s happening in other countries?
The story around Europe is good and bad. Some countries propose changing their laws, others have decided to adopt the Kennel Club's stance: punish the deed not the breed.

Believe it or not, if you go to Ireland with a Bulldog, Staffie, GSD, Akita, Ridgeback, Rottweiler, Tosa or Pit Bull, the Control of Dogs Regulations 1991 say the dog has to be muzzled. But talking to owners, they say that provided their dogs are under control, this doesn't seem to be a problem. For more information phone the Irish Tourist Board 08000 397 000.

Austria has taken our Kennel Club's view and sees control of dogs as very much the responsibility of the owner. If a dog causes death by biting, the owner receives three years in prison. A simple bite will warrant a fine and/or six months in prison.

The French Ministry of Agriculture has decided Staffordshire Bull Terriers will NOT become a banned breed in France. However, at the Newfoundland Water Trials last month owners were extremely worried at what restrictions might be placed on larger breeds.

Sensibly, a Swiss proposal for BSL was recently rejected by their Parliament. In Sweden they are more concerned about legislation in relation to wolf crosses and breeds closely related to the wolf, but Portugal has legislation on the stocks which will concern Doberman, Staffie, Boxer, Rottweiler and GSD owners. Proposals are before the Portuguese Parliament to muzzle certain breeds – watch this space.

If you have interests in the Netherlands have a look at a long letter on www.xs4all.nl from the Minister of Agriculture, Laurens Jan Brinkhorst, to the Chairman of the Standing Committee for Agriculture. It seems sensible, until one small paragraph discusses extending a national ban 'to other types of dog' with the chilling suggestion "to this end I will ask experts, if possible from the EU, to advise me."

Recently Eva Busse, writing in Germany's influential newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung surmised that 'Move to ban Attack Dogs has Lost its Bite'. Anomalies range from the State of Saarland where only three breeds are considered dangerous, to Nord Rhine-Westphalia where the public apparently face 'danger' from 42 types of dog. In some German states these dogs must undergo a personality test; fail this and the dog could be put down. In Hamburg you face a fine of £40,000 if your dog is on the register and goes out without a muzzle.

All this has had an effect – but perhaps not what the legislators bargained for. So many 'aggressive' dogs have been handed in by owners that State funds have had to be increased to foot the bill to look after them. According to Busse, the upshot is that "last year’s sense of urgency has given way to foot-dragging", with local administrative courts testing the legality of hasty decrees, and handing down contradictory rulings.

Tellingly, the German Animal Welfare Society points out that any dog can be trained to attack, and banning certain breeds could encourage criminals to use other breeds. And the German Association for Dogs' Character is looking for "serious dog owners without a criminal record" to challenge Judges' rulings.

The country to watch could be Denmark as their Government feels current legislation is inadequate. Andrina Morton, a Glasgow Staffie owner and BSL campaigner writes "The Ministry of Justice is considering whether or not to ban other breeds, or to adopt a different approach altogether, since many of the problems with dangerous dogs seem to be directly related to the specific circumstances under which the dogs are kept". Remember, it was Denmark, and only Denmark, that got 'duty free' abolished. All other 14 EU countries wanted to keep privileges, but the Danish Commissioner voted NO, so every other EU country was obliged to ban duty free between EU states.

One hopes the Danish Commissioner will see sense this time, but everyone must keep up the pressure. Unfortunately for 'Duty Free', when Tony Blair finally decided to act it was too late. European countries look to Britain for leadership within the EU, and there is no doubt that we have influence because of our massive EU contributions. So British dog owners must ensure our politicians know what we think. After you have written to your MP and MEP, alert friends abroad, get them to write to their MEPs and politicians, and suggest they keep a watching brief on what is going on in their country.

For news of what is happening in other countries, see www.staffordmall.com and watch out for 'Deadly Dogs', a TV programme scheduled for broadcast on Sunday, 9th September, 8pm on Channel5.
 
I think you know very little about dogs and probably don't care to learn. Someone with your way of thinking certainly doesn't need a dog. About all you "know" is what you read in the paper or hear on the news. Yes my dog will never attack anything because I see to it she's under control at all times and I know how to handle dogs. There's way too many people like you in the world that know little and talk a lot. I suggest you watch the show "Dog Whisperer" and see where your media myths stand with people that know better. Maybe if you bother to learn the facts about dogs you will realize that it's people that own the dog that are at fault and not entire "breeds". Then again maybe you'd just as soon act like you already know everything because you read it in the paper or saw it on the evening news. So that makes you an "expert". Funny thing my family lives out in the country and we always had Pit Bulls and other breeds you would lump together as being dangerous. They never attacked anyone or bothered any stock. It's all in being a dog person and having the know how to handle dogs. If you can't be bothered with it then no you shouldn't own a dog. But then you seem one of those people that thinks there should be 100% guarantees in this world so maybe we should all turn in our knives, firearms as well as all large dogs because we have no 100% guarantee our neighbor won't go down to the local Mcdonalds with his pack of Pit/rotts and a car load of sharp knives and guns start sicing dogs and cutting/shooting people. No dude we have no 100% guarantees in this world that stupid people won't go nuts and misuse the things we wouldn't do we? So we as Americans choose to allow ownership of things other countries ban and deal with the ones that misuse them. And yes I can be a responsible dog owner just as I can be a responsible firearms/knife owner. I can't speak for my fellow citizen, but I can myself. (BTW maybe you think we should follow England's lead and ban all dogs that may be a threat, ban all firearms and make most all knives illegal as well. They have tryed to give people their 100% guarantees so you can't legally carry a knife over there, or have one that locks open. Firearms are out of the question, while they was going about it they banned a lot of dogs just on breed alone. I guess that's your sort of place to live isn't it?:barf: )



as much of an expert as somebody who cuts and paste dog articles........................

my guns and knives are not living creatures...............i can give you 100% chance of them not going and shooting or cutting up sombody..........hell, i dont even have to have a sitter for em' they just sit in the safe until i get em. perfect training if you ask me.............

jill you cannot give 100% certainty that your dogs will not attack something that didnt need to be attacked............................
 
as much of an expert as somebody who cuts and paste dog articles........................

my guns and knives are not living creatures...............i can give you 100% chance of them not going and shooting or cutting up sombody..........hell, i dont even have to have a sitter for em' they just sit in the safe until i get em. perfect training if you ask me.............

jill you cannot give 100% certainty that your dogs will not attack something that didnt need to be attacked............................

No but you could go crazy and start shooting people You cannot give 100% "guarantee" you won't never.(after all you are a human and they've done just that before) That's the way Britain deals with guns, knives and dogs. I can see to it that my dog is up and under my control at all times. Why would I allow or encourage her to attack somebody or an innocent animal? If she's only out with me while hiking and the rest of the time in my basement with my other dogs just how is she going to do anything I don't allow? She's not trained to attack people and I could lead her up to you and she'd lick your hand. All you know is what some pit bulls and rotties did, just like other countries ban knives and firearms based on what some people did. Your argument makes just as much sense as theirs. (why shouldn't i show other opinions besides just mine? i'm not so narrow minded as most here to think there's not a lot to learn) p.s you see where Germany banned bull breeds then a German Shepherd kills a young girl? wow now they have to ban those as well?
 
Alice Springs, Australia

A psycho maniac wielding a pair of deadly katana swords sliced and diced a group of helpess tourists at Alice Springs in Australia today. Before he committed hara kiri, he mentioned something about the government taking away all his guns because of some other psycho in Hobart, and he was angry that his collection of ancient muskets were confiscated, hence his killing spree.

The outraged citizens of Australia, fearing for their lovely little children, demanded that the government install knife control, a strict set of restrictions limiting the distribution of anything at or below the length of swiss army knives, and banning longer blades outright. Several civil liberties groups, especially ones in New South Wales and Queensland, as well as the Outback, complained to the government, saying that with their guns gone, their knives were their only line of defense. Says the Crocodile Dundee:

"Those bloody wankers in the ACT already took away all my guns, and I had to hunt after the 20-foot crocs with nothing but knives! Look at me! One of the buggers bit off my left hand already! Now they want me to hunt bare-handed? What if they bite off my other hand? Then I can't hold my Foster's anymore!"

In response to the complaints, several "blade awareness groups", including the Citizens for a Safer, Knife-less Australia and Association against pointy objects, marched in Canberra to push for stricter laws against knives. They were seen running around the nation's capital, screaming abuse at the smaller and helpess group of pro-knife defenders. However, when the civil liberties groups pulled out their blades to defend themselves against the mob, they immediately called for the police to arrest them, claiming that they were carrying concealed weapons. They then covered the eyes of their children, telling them not to look at the "horrible murderers".

It was all in vain for the freedom fighters, for the anti-knife law was passed, giving the citizens of Australia a much needed feeling of self-righteousness and sense of security. The now defunct Knife Party, formerly the Gun Party (disbanded when guns were banned), changed its name to the Cricket Bat Party in anticipation of the next wave of anti-self-defense legislation oozing out of Canberra.

In another story, a bunch of meat pie-throwing thugs robbed several homes in the trendy suburb of Paddington, Sydney today, after the homeowners, deprived of their beloved knifes, failed to fight them off. John Howard promised to enact laws banning meat pies, an Australian culinary speciality. "It's for the children.", he added.
 
Summary - the Interpretation

Police and law enforcement officers interpret the regulations according to their perception of the situation. Their questioning is to establish the intent of the person found possessing a weapon. If you are caught carrying a shaken you must be licensed and/or have lawful authority or justification, otherwise you will be subject to the penalty mentioned above. If you are caught carrying a bo shuriken, it will be interpreted in much the same way as carrying a knife. If it cannot be shown that the weapon is in your possession due to some connection with a lawful or reasonable activity, then you will be subject to a penalty of 20 units (I unit = $75) or 6 months imprisonment. It is also important to note, whether you are carrying weapons lawfully or not, being under the influence of drugs or alcohol while in possession of Category A - H and R weapons, and knives, is an offence.

These are the laws regarding carrying. The laws regarding use are different altogether. While you cannot lawfully carry any weapon for self defence, it must only, if at all, be for protection of property. When the situation arises that you or someone else is in immediate, life-threatening danger, that you are, or that someone else is "fearful for their life", then you are allowed to use any means at your disposal to protect that life. If one is carrying weapons of any kind, serious questions will be asked about your intent, but if it can be shown that you were within the law in carrying and use of the weapons, there will generally be no penalty. However, as in all cases, the final decision rests with the satisfaction of the law enforcement officers, and/or the presiding judge if it goes to trial.

There is talk at the moment of prohibiting the carrying of a screwdriver without due cause, no doubt because of this tool's use in a number of attacks recently.
 
omg somebody take her cut and paste magic away.............:rolleyes:

Lets take that away, all dogs which can bite, all your pointy knives and ones that are sharp, screwdrivers, all guns that fire, in fact ban everything which can cause harm and then you will have your "100% assurance" of no harm. :barf: and mommy can tuck you in at night and tell you how safe you are because there's nothing out there that can hurt her wittle baby.:rolleyes:
 
Lets take that away, all dogs which can bite, all your pointy knives and ones that are sharp, screwdrivers, all guns that fire, in fact ban everything which can cause harm and then you will have your "100% assurance" of no harm. :barf: and mommy can tuck you in at night and tell you how safe you are because there's nothing out there that can hurt her wittle baby.:rolleyes:

at first i had an idea that you were not a girl................



but the way you rant and carry on, you cant be anything but...................................;)
 
at first i had an idea that you were not a girl................



but the way you rant and carry on, you cant be anything but...................................;)

I have some idea's about you as well. Oh my Jill can you "100%" be certain your big bad PIT BULL will never attack anything that doesn't need it:confused: ? Cause I really wanted to go outside today and play in my sandbox. Yes bkkd go on outside she's a good doggy and besides she's on a leash while out. Then I'll lock her up in the basement, I don't want to frighten you.:o
 
I have some idea's about you as well. Oh my Jill can you "100%" be certain your big bad PIT BULL will never attack anything that doesn't need it:confused: ? Cause I really wanted to go outside today and play in my sandbox. Yes bkkd go on outside she's a good doggy and besides she's on a leash while out. Then I'll lock her up in the basement, I don't want to frighten you.:o


oh i wouldnt worry about your puppy hon, i got something for that....................:D
 
Hey this jacked thread is maybe getting to be interesting. My corn is popping and I got my beer. :D I got no use for people that get all caught up in how big a biter their dog is. I don't let anyone do my fighting. Forget the dog, beware the owner. ;)
 
Looking for information on the hunting dogs used in Australia, follow the links below for information on these dogs.
Catahoula - A recent import to Australia, gaining popularity as a finder/bailer. Refer links below for Aussie Cats.

Auscat Catahoula's

First Strike Catahoula's

American Bull Dogs - Another new breed gaining popularity.

Ridgebacks - A breed used for many years to add size and stamina into Australian Pig Dogs

Deerhounds - Mainly used for faster game, but added into pig dog crosses

Pit Bulls - used in their pure form or crossed, for holding abilities.

Cross Breeds

The mainstay of Australian pig hunters, the good old cross bred hog dog.

Crossed to add individual traits of various pure bred dogs, I don't think a cross hasn't been tried except for maybe the toy breeds. Most have a dash of bull somewhere in their linage, but the rest can be a combination of virtually anything. The crosses add what is referred to as Hybrid Vigour, and just about everyone that pursues the wild boar have their favorite combinations. Many a beer has been downed whilst discussing the best combinations, a habit that will continue with time.




Bull Arab - Australia's own purpose bred pig hunting dog. (click on the page numbers) - Pages - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Bully/Greyhound - Heart and speed, and in great demand as an all round pig dog - Pages - 1 2 3

Staghounds - The old bush dogs, for fast game but they also do well on pigs.

Bull Mastiff/Great Dane - Size and power, a well proven cross in Australia. From BOARDOGS.COM an Au site about pig hunting with dogs and knives.

Jill:

there are no links shown.

I am looking for information on crosses of ridgebacks and catahola, can you help?

thanks,

A. G.
 
oh i wouldnt worry about your puppy hon, i got something for that....................:D

And that's the way it should be, I know I deal with my own protection in this big bad world. If we all would it would be a better place. Other than that you and a few other posters here are totally ignorant about dogs. Of course you should defend yourself and loved ones against any real threats. But just because my dog is of a certain breed does not pose any threat to you. Of course you'd think otherwise! You'd never dream that you could be wrong! Or that anyone could be a responsible dog owner.
 
[QUOTEmetallicat;=Hey this jacked thread is maybe getting to be interesting. My corn is popping and I got my beer. :D I got no use for people that get all caught up in how big a biter their dog is. I don't let anyone do my fighting. Forget the dog, beware the owner. ;)[/QUOTE]

If you can't see that countries like Australia, England and Germany that ban entire breeds of dogs based on what a few of the breed may have done, are also the ones that are banning all firearms and most edged weapons (even screwdriver carry) based on what a few people have done then you are unseeing and uncaring. Thing is talking with a friend in Australia about what happened to Ming's little dog she said he was illegally carrying that Spyderco salt. I'm not 100% sure about that but based on what I've found I believe she may be right. She says carry of a knife bigger than a Swiss army knife is illegal. (and just where did I ever say I'd allow my dog to bite anyone? You and others think just because a person owns a certain breed of dog they go about letting it fight people? Nothing suprises me about that of course you'd think all dogs of certain breeds are a threat to people and now comes all the macho male ego stuff about how you got bad news weapons to deal with it)
 
[QUOTEmetallicat;=Hey this jacked thread is maybe getting to be interesting. My corn is popping and I got my beer. :D I got no use for people that get all caught up in how big a biter their dog is. I don't let anyone do my fighting. Forget the dog, beware the owner. ;)

If you can't see that countries like Australia, England and Germany that ban entire breeds of dogs based on what a few of the breed may have done, are also the ones that are banning all firearms and most edged weapons (even screwdriver carry) based on what a few people have done then you are unseeing and uncaring. Thing is talking with a friend in Australia about what happened to Ming's little dog she said he was illegally carrying that Spyderco salt. I'm not 100% sure about that but based on what I've found I believe she may be right. She says carry of a knife bigger than a Swiss army knife is illegal. (and just where did I ever say I'd allow my dog to bite anyone? You and others think just because a person owns a certain breed of dog they go about letting it fight people? Nothing suprises me about that of course you'd think all dogs of certain breeds are a threat to people and now comes all the macho male ego stuff about how you got bad news weapons to deal with it)[/QUOTE]



:jerkit:
 
Today’s media is filled with sensational headlines of dog attacks. Routinely quoted in these newspaper accounts are dated statistics from the Centers for Disease Control. The last CDC study released documented which breeds of dogs caused the most human fatalities from 1979 through 1998. While the CDC did an admirable job of studying fatal dog attacks, and went to great lengths to point out that irresponsible owners were the cause of most of these incidents, the media and lawmakers continue to use CDC statistics to substantiate claims that certain breeds of dogs are inherently more "vicious" than other breeds.

The result of sensationalizing individual incidents of severe or fatal dog attacks, included with the use of unexamined statistical "evidence" has created an unfortunate and inaccurate public and political perception as to the dangerousness and predictability of certain breeds of dogs. Despite enormous public and political interest in fatal dog attacks, there is no agency or organization that does investigative work (with the exception of this study) into each of the individual cases of fatal dog attacks and records the number and circumstances of fatal dog attacks on a continuous, yearly basis.

This study is conducted in an attempt to understand the human and canine behaviors that contribute to a fatal dog attack. Only in understanding the events and circumstances surrounding these incidents can we hope to prevent future tragedies.

STUDY FINDINGS:
After reviewing over 431 cases of fatal dog attacks it is apparent there is no single factor that translates in a lethal encounter between a person and a dog(s). A fatal dog attack is always the culmination of past and present events that include: inherited and learned behaviors, genetics, breeding, socialization, function of the dog, physical condition and size of the dog, reproductive status of dog, popularity of breed, individual temperament, environmental stresses, owner responsibility, victim behavior, victim size and physical condition, timing and misfortune.

While many circumstances may contribute to a fatal dog attack, the following three factors appear to play a critical role in the display of canine aggression towards humans;

Function of the dog - (Includes: dogs acquired for fighting, guarding/protection or image enhancement)


Owner responsibility - (Includes: dogs allowed to roam loose, chained dogs, dogs and/or children left unsupervised, dogs permitted or encouraged to behave aggressively, animal neglect and/or abuse)


Reproductive status of dog - (Includes: unaltered males dogs, bitches with puppies, children coming between male dog and female dog in estrus)
It is necessary to emphasize that a fatal dog attack is an exceptionally unusual event. Approximating 20 deaths per year in a dog population of 53 million yields an infinitesimal percent of the dog population (.0000004%) involved in a human fatality.

THE BREED FACTOR
Many communities and cities believe that the solution to prevent severe and fatal dog attacks is to label, restrict or ban certain breeds of dogs as potentially dangerous. If the breed of dog was the primary or sole determining factor in a fatal dog attack, it would necessarily stand to reason that since there are literally millions of Rottweilers, Pit Bulls and German Shepherd Dogs in the United States, there would have to be countless more than an approximate 20 human fatalities per year.

Since only an infinitesimal number of any breed is implicated in a human fatality, it is not only unreasonable to characterize this as a specific breed behavior by which judge an entire population of dogs, it also does little to prevent fatal or severe dog attacks as the real causes and events that contribute to a fatal attack are masked by the issue of breed and not seriously addressed.

Pit Bulls in particular have been in a firestorm of bad publicity, and throughout the country Pit Bulls often bear the brunt of breed specific legislation. One severe or fatal attack can result in either restrictions or outright banning of this breed (and other breeds) in a community. While any severe or fatal attack on a person is tragic, there is often a tragic loss of perspective as to degree of dangerousness associated with this breed in reaction to a fatality. Virtually any breed of dog can be implicated in a human fatality.

From 1965 - 2001, there have been at least 36 different breeds/types of dog that have been involved in a fatal attack in the United States. (This number rises to at least 52 breeds/types when surveying fatal attacks worldwide). We are increasingly becoming a society that has less and less tolerance and understanding of natural canine behaviors. Breed specific behaviors that have been respected and selected for over the centuries are now often viewed as unnatural or dangerous. Dogs have throughout the centuries served as protectors and guardians of our property, possessions and families. Dogs have also been used for thousands of years to track, chase and hunt both large and small animals. These natural and selected-for canine behaviors seem to now eliciting fear, shock and a sense of distrust among many people.

There seems to be an ever growing expectation of a "behaviorally homogenized" dog - "Benji" in the shape of a Rottweiler. Breeds of dogs with greater protection instincts or an elevated prey-drive are often unfairly viewed as "aggressive or dangerous". No breed of dog is inherently vicious, as all breeds of dogs were created and are maintained exclusively to serve and co-exist with humans. The problem exists not within the breed of dog, but rather within the owners that fail to control, supervise, maintain and properly train the breed of dog they choose to keep.

CANINE AGGRESSION - AN OVERVIEW
It is important to emphasize that dogs bite today for the same reasons that they did one hundred or one thousand years ago. Dogs are no more dangerous today than they were a century or millennium ago. They only difference is a shift in human perception of what is and is not natural canine behavior and/or aggression and the breed of dog involved.

Examination of newspaper archival records dating back to the 1950’s and 1960’s reveal the same types of severe and fatal attacks occurring then as today. The only difference is the breed of dog responsible for these events. A random study of 74 severe and fatal attacks reported in the Evening Bulletin (Philadelphia, PA) from 1964-1968, show no severe or fatal attacks by Rottweilers and only one attack attributed to a Pit-Bull-type dog. The dogs involved in most of these incidents were the breeds that were popular at the time.

Over two thousand years ago, Plato extolled a basic understanding of canine behavior when he wrote "the disposition of noble dogs is to be gentle with people they know and the opposite with those they don’t know...." Recently, this fundamental principal of canine behavior seems to elude many people as parents allow their children to be unsupervised with unfamiliar dogs and lawmakers clamor to declare certain dogs as dangerous in response to an attack.

Any dog, regardless of breed, is only as dangerous as his/her owner allows it to be.

Addressing the issue of severe and fatal dog attacks as a breed specific problem is akin to treating the symptom and not the disease. Severe and fatal attacks will continue until we come to the realization that allowing a toddler to wander off to a chained dog is more of a critical factor in a fatal dog attack than which breed of dog is at the end of the chain.

Only when we become more knowledgeable, humane and responsible in our treatment of dogs can we hope to prevent future tragedies.
 
If you can't see that countries like Australia, England and Germany that ban entire breeds of dogs based on what a few of the breed may have done, are also the ones that are banning all firearms and most edged weapons (even screwdriver carry) based on what a few people have done then you are unseeing and uncaring. Thing is talking with a friend in Australia about what happened to Ming's little dog she said he was illegally carrying that Spyderco salt. I'm not 100% sure about that but based on what I've found I believe she may be right. She says carry of a knife bigger than a Swiss army knife is illegal. (and just where did I ever say I'd allow my dog to bite anyone? You and others think just because a person owns a certain breed of dog they go about letting it fight people? Nothing surprises me about that of course you'd think all dogs of certain breeds are a threat to people and now comes all the macho male ego stuff about how you got bad news weapons to deal with it)[/QUOTE]



:jerkit:[/QUOTE]

Are your mental capacities down to the jerk it emote now bkkd? Of course you would never see the relation between banning a breed of dog and banning other things that can be dangerous when misused or uncared for would you?
 
Back
Top