What Kind of Dog is This?

[matthewb0051]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

? Enough is enough. These animals have no place in society.

Seems the Germans agree with you:

Attacks on people by dangerous dogs - in some cases with fatal results - have made legislation to combat dangerous dogs necessary. As a result the (Hundeverbringungs- und -einfuhrbeschränkungsgesetz) came into force in 2001. Its provisions include a ban on the import and/or transfer of dogs that are classified as dangerous.

The Customs administration is involved in monitoring the import of these breeds of dog.

The Dog Transfer and Import Restrictions Act prohibits the import or transfer into Germany of certain breeds of dog and crossbreeding of these dogs with one another, or with other breeds.

It refers to these breeds of dog:

Pit Bull Terrier
American Staffordshire Terrier
Staffordshire Bull Terrier
Bull Terrier

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

The article doesn't say:



Sheriff: 22-year-old Va. woman mauled to death by own dogs | KOMO

GOOCHLAND Co., Va. (WSET) — Police in Goochland County, Virginia are investigating after a woman was found dead in a wooded area in the eastern part of the county.
Police said they've determined the woman was mauled to death by her own dogs, according to WRIC in Richmond.

The Goochland County Sheriff's Office said it got a call around 8:15 p.m. Thursday from a man who found the woman's body near the 2200 block of Manakin Road.
The sheriff's office later said it was the woman's father who went looking for his daughter where she often walked her dogs.
On Friday, police identified the woman as 22-year-old Bethany Stephens.

When deputies found her body, they said her body had suffered "severe trauma" and was being guarded by the two dogs.
"It appeared the attack was a violent attack initiated by the victims' dogs while the victim was out for a walk with the dogs," Sheriff Agnew said the Medical Examiner's initial report indicated. "The victim had defensive wounds on her hands and arms trying to keep the dogs away from her, which would be consistent with being attacked while she was still alive."

Sheriff James Agnew said it appeared the first traumatic injury she suffered was to her throat and face.
"It appears she was taken to the ground, lost consciousness, and the dogs then mauled her to death," he said.
The sheriff's office said deputies had to use tranquilizer guns to catch the dogs.
"It was an absolutely grisly mauling," Goochland County Sheriff Agnew said. "In my 40 years of law enforcement, I've never seen anything quite like it. I hope I never see anything like it again."
The dogs are with Goochland Animal Control and the sheriff's office said the dogs will be euthanized.

It's one of them deadly dachshunds we always read about.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by Aerkuld

Jeff - for every 'bad' pit bull you can find I'm sure I could show you ten that are the sweetest dogs you'll ever meet. You can't just say an entire breed of dog is aggressive anymore than someone else can blame violence on a particular type of gun.

[Tobra]

All the dogs I have ever had have been rescues, never picked one out or purchased one in my life. I have been exposed to hundreds, if not over a thousand PB mixes, and have yet to see one that scared me or acted aggressive in my presence. My experience is not going to change anyone's mind, any more than Jeff is going to change mine.



Carry on with your trolling Jeff.


Make no mistake, that is precisely what you are doing. I won't be rising to the bait ever again though, what possible good could ever come of it.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Tobra

All the dogs I have ever had have been rescues, never picked one out or purchased one in my life. I have been exposed to hundreds, if not over a thousand PB mixes, and have yet to see one that scared me or acted aggressive in my presence. My experience is not going to change anyone's mind, any more than Jeff is going to change mine.

I'm not trying to change your mind - this is not about you. I'm simply trying to raise awareness among those who may not be cognizant of the dangers inherent in this breed. There is far to much misinformation out there, including outright lies from those who deny what all available evidence so clearly demonstrates.

Originally Posted by Tobra

Carry on with your trolling Jeff.

Make no mistake, that is precisely what you are doing. I won't be rising to the bait ever again though, what possible good could ever come of it.

No, I am not trolling. I suppose, however, if you have absolutely no evidence based rebuttal to the case against pit bulls, you might decide to fall back on some false accusations in an effort to discredit the source, rather than address the actual evidence. That's always so much easier when your position fails to hold up under scrutiny.

So, yes, by all means - stay out of this. You offer nothing of value. You have proven to be remarkably impervious to the facts surrounding the dangers of this breed. As a matter of fact, your irrational, emotionally driven nonsense could very well lead to some poor innocent trusting this breed and getting hurt, or worse, because they listened to you. I would hate to see that happen.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

It's one of them deadly dachshunds we always read about.

Total bs...it ain't the breed Sammy....

She's one of them tatted up, lowlife thuggish gang bangers we always read about.

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by Tobra

All the dogs I have ever had have been rescues, never picked one out or purchased one in my life. I have been exposed to hundreds, if not over a thousand PB mixes, and have yet to see one that scared me or acted aggressive in my presence. My experience is not going to change anyone's mind,....

We're all experienced at this point in our lives Toby. Just different ones...

My friends' saga began when an adorable little 8 week old PB was rescued and brought into their pack of three....

No one is gonna change their minds, I've loved every single one I've been around.

Too many other great dawgs with minimal risks out there....just in case....

[Baz]

I would urge anyone who does not fully understand and possess proper knowledge of what it takes to be owned by man's best friend - to simply forgo acquisition of a dog.

Period.

Regardless of breed.

These are not objects to collect and own.

They are living beings with needs.

Dumb chit humans need not apply.

[javadog]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I'm not trying to change your mind - this is not about you. I'm simply trying to raise awareness among those who may not be cognizant of the dangers inherent in this breed. There is far to much misinformation out there, including outright lies from those who deny what all available evidence so clearly demonstrates.

No, I am not trolling. I suppose, however, if you have absolutely no evidence based rebuttal to the case against pit bulls, you might decide to fall back on some false accusations in an effort to discredit the source, rather than address the actual evidence. That's always so much easier when your position fails to hold up under scrutiny.

So, yes, by all means - stay out of this. You offer nothing of value. You have proven to be remarkably impervious to the facts surrounding the dangers of this breed. As a matter of fact, your irrational, emotionally driven nonsense could very well lead to some poor innocent trusting this breed and getting hurt, or worse, because they listened to you. I would hate to see that happen.

There's quite a bit of misinformation in this thread, supporting your side of the argument. I could point it out, but what's the point? You and your supporters would simply deny it.

You ignore the evidence from interview clips of people that study dog behavior and psychology for a living, some of which has been posted in this thread. You chide others for attacking the messenger, when you do the same thing.

The best advice you could offer, is for people to simply not own a dog.

[Crowbob]

Baz,

Not to be disrespectful or anything but we're talking about an animal. Animals have no rights. They are collected and owned by humans, who do have rights.

[sammyg2]

All breeds of dogs can bite. All breeds of dogs are capable of attacking people.

I'm pretty sure everyone can agree with that.


When different breeds of dogs attack, the results vary greatly.

A small toy breed like Pekingese or shih tzu can bite, and can break the skin. But that's pretty much the extent of it in all but the most extreme cases.

A pit bull terrier was designed and bred to combine and maximize strength, aggressiveness, viciousness, and the ability to keep fighting and attacking until it kills.
Those are the traits needed for fighting dogs.
Just like greyhounds were bred to run fast.

Those are facts and no knowledgeable person would dispute them.

Pit bulls at their core are gentle loving dogs, just like all other domesticated breeds. But in there somewhere is still that capability, that tendency to fight and kill.

A golden retriever is bred to have a "soft mouth".
IOW is is designed not to bite down hard so it doesn't destroy the bird it retrieves. It can bit down hard, but usually does not. It is "not in it's nature".
A golden might bite but will not rip your face off and sever your spine and rip your throat out.
Pit bulls can do those very things and do those things on occasion. They may not be more likely to attack than other breeds, but when they do attack the results are exponentially worse.

Other breeds considered more dangerous than others include rottweilers, german Shepherds, dobermans, akitas, and chow chows.

Take away the emotional knee-jerking and look at it rationally and logically and those are the conclusions that we land on.

Pit bulls were created by breeding bulldogs and terriers together to produce a dog that combined the gameness and agility of the terrier with the strength of the bulldog.[3] In the United Kingdom, these dogs were used in blood sports such as bull-baiting and bear-baiting. These blood sports were officially eliminated in 1835 as Britain began to introduce animal welfare laws. Since dogfights were cheaper to organize and far easier to conceal from the law than bull or bear baits, blood sport proponents turned to pitting their dogs against each other instead. Dog fighting was used as both a blood sport (often involving gambling) and a way to continue to test the quality of their stock. For decades afterwards, dog fighting clandestinely took place in small areas of Britain and America. In the early 20th century pit bulls were used as catch dogs in America for semi-wild cattle and hogs, to hunt, and drive livestock, and as family companions.[3] Some have been selectively bred for their fighting prowess.[5][6]

Pit bulls also constitute the majority of dogs used for illegal dog fighting in America.[11] In addition, law enforcement organisations report these dogs are used for other nefarious purposes, such as guarding illegal narcotics operations,[12][13] use against police,[14] and as attack dogs.[15] On the other side of the law, pit bulls have been used as police dogs.[16][17]

In an effort to counter the fighting reputation of pit bull-type dogs, in 1996 the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals renamed pit bull terriers to "St. Francis Terriers", so that people might be more likely to adopt them.[18] 60 temperament-screened dogs were adopted until the program was halted, after several of the newly adopted pit bulls killed cats.[19]

In a 2000 review by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which examines data from both media reports and from The Humane Society of the United States, pit bull-type dogs were identified in approximately one-third of dog bite-related fatalities in the United States between 1981 and 1992.

[javadog]

Originally Posted by Crowbob

Baz,

Not to be disrespectful or anything but we're talking about an animal. Animals have no rights. They are collected and owned by humans, who do have rights.

I hate to single you out, but this is morally and ethically troubling. It also ignores how humans have bred dogs to interact with them over the last many centuries. Legally, perhaps you are correct. In all other respects, someone who views a relationship with a dog in this way shouldn't "own" a dog.

[icemann427]

I may be totally wrong, but I can't imagine those two dogs just standing there, allowing their master to be hurt/attacked, without their intervention. And as such, they would have wounds, too...

[Crowbob]

Originally Posted by javadog

I hate to single you out, but this is morally and ethically troubling. It also ignores how humans have bred dogs to interact with them over the last many centuries. Legally, perhaps you are correct. In all other respects, someone who views a relationship with a dog in this way shouldn't "own" a dog.

The moral and ethical concern lies with individuals who conflate humane treatment of animals with the inalienable rights of humans.

It is not surprising you would single out the legality of the concept at issue here, which is indisputable, in an effort to disparage the fact that no animal could ever be held accountable for taking the life of another animal. Worse, the implication that an animal can somehow be justified for doing so smacks at pathological anthropomorphism.

Without going into too much detail about difficult subjects such as morals, ethics or even self-loathing, concepts no animal (nor even some humans) can comprehend, no animal, however 'loyal' it appears to be, has a right to life or liberty.

[javadog]

Your reply indicates that you missed my point entirely. If you ever figure it out, I would be happy to discuss it.

[Crowbob]

Were I to have ever figured it out, why would there be a need to discuss?

Animals do not have rights. If you care to discuss this point, I'm all ears.

[javadog]

Ponder how a human views a relationship with the dog. Then ponder how the dog views the same relationship. Then consider how that difference impacts the relationship between the two.

[Crowbob]

I have, java.

You appear, on more than one occasion, to have intimated that I am unworthy of owning a dog simply by virtue of my statement of fact that animals do not have rights.

I am willing to discuss it further but that may not be possible as I cannot tell if you agree or disagree with that statement of fact.

One of the more difficult things I've ever had to do in my life was to put down a dog for reasons completely relavent to this discussion. If it was the wrong thing to do, which you appear to believe, I'd like to hear your argument.

Otherwise, the best I can hope for is a retraction of your assessment of my capacity for the responsibility inherent in the ownership of a dog.

[Baz]

Originally Posted by Crowbob

Baz,

Not to be disrespectful or anything but we're talking about an animal. Animals have no rights. They are collected and owned by humans, who do have rights.

Hey Bob,

No worries but was there something in my post (#49) you disagreed with that caused you to post this?

If so, would appreciate knowing that.

I don't believe I said anything about "rights".

That speaks more to laws that are 'on the books' than where I was going.

I would also like to know what your dog has to say about all this....

[javadog]

To simplify it: dogs are not capable of understanding our frame of reference. To have a successful relationship with the dog, you have to learn to view it as the dog does. When we think of applying our moral and ethical standards to the relationship, we have already failed. The point I have made, time and again, is that most failures in a relationship between a human and dog originate with the human. It's why I think that most people should not "own" dogs and largely why we continue to have problems with them. Most people have no problems, in spite of themselves, as the dog is fully focused on trying to make the relationship successful. Sadly, I would say that most of the incidents involving a dog would not occur with a more knowledgeable human involved. I have no idea what happened in this particular case, I suspect the investigation is ongoing, if it is not a foregone conclusion. I can tell you that the above photograph of the woman with the dog does not show a happy dog. I also don't know if it is one of the dogs involved, as they were described as being between 100 and 125 pounds, and that dog is nowhere near that.

Of course, that also involves the media, which probably gets at least half of every story wrong.