frank ryan Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 Still waiting Frank for you to tell us what the 'safe breeds' are, as per your earlier post wait no longer newbiz - I answered previously - those that were not bred for power, jaw strength and aggression - keep up matey, it's not rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 my dog is more pleasant and tolerant than me , that's for sure - but more intelligent? - perhaps in your case, but I can read and write and dogzy can't! a kid's seriously injured cos some **** decided to own a bull terrier, that's the issue. If he'd chosen a safe breed , the child would be eating her sunday dinner and be off to school in the morning and the owner wouldn't be in the papers tomorrow and facing 2 years in jail I didn't say a dog was more intelligent than you so obviously your reading skills are lacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vwkittie Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 It is the owner’s fault, just like when a car kills someone, we don't scrap the car we punish the driver. It should be the same with a dog, punish the owner not the dog. Of course, because a car is capable of escaping from a garage and running over someone all by itself! What a daft analogy! Whilst I agree that often it's the case that bad ownership causes problems with dogs, there ARE such things as dangerous dogs. A dog that has torn off a child's ear in an unprovoked attack is clearly dangerous, no matter what has caused it to behave like that in the first place. What would you do with it? You say punish the owner and yes I totally agree with that, clearly the owner should not be in control of a dog at all. So now the dog is homeless. Where will it go? To a shelter? Who would rehome a dog that's been known to attack a child? Should it languish in a kennel for the rest of it's life? If someone did rehome it, how would they prevent it ever happening again - they'd have to at least keep it muzzled and on a lead the rest of its life. And even then they couldn't ever 100% guarantee the dog would never escape or a mistake would never happen. If it did and it harmed someone, who would be to blame - the current owner, the rescue centre, the police for not putting it down in the first place? Not to mention the fact that there's thousands of dogs out there in need of a home who haven't attacked children, hundreds of those are put to sleep because no one wants them and why would anyone chose a known aggressive dog over one of those? Why should charity or council resources be used up on a potentially dangerous dog when there are better cases for money to be spent on? The best option for dogs that have attacked is for them to be put to sleep, for their own sake as much as public safety. The idea that anyone considers any breed of dog 'safe' is scary and very worrying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 There is no such thing as a 'safe' breed. I guarantee that if you hurt any dog enough it will bite you. One of my friends has a very sweet and gentle shihtzu, who is basically a stuffed toy that moves (sometimes). He caught one of his claws and broke it down inside his toe, causing him to limp and the toe to bleed quite profusely. My friend asked me for help in taking a look at the toe because the dog wouldn't hold still and let her clean it up, and when she was holding him he was obviously in great pain because he bit her rather than let me clean up his foot. Is he a dangerous dog too? I think shiatsu’s are classed as quite an aggressive dog but because they are small they could’t be classed as dangerous, although I would think one could do some serious damage to a baby or small child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBiz Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 wait no longer newbiz - I answered previously - those that were not bred for power, jaw strength and aggression - keep up matey, it's not rocket science. So the 'safe breeds' would include Dachunds and Border Collies presumably, according to your definition. Yet the last time I checked the stats they were 2 of the breeds most likely to bite. A small Border Collie, or a standard Dachund would be more than capable of inflicting serious damage on a child. Oh and there's no need to be so cocky Frank, particularly when you don't appear to know what you're talking about. PS excuse the spelling of Dachund, I know it's not right but can't be arsed to Google it right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank ryan Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 I didn't say a dog was more intelligent than you so obviously your reading skills are lacking. you said that some dogs are more intelligent than their owners didn't you? if the cap fits ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 Why do I need to excuse you? I never said anything about your dog hurting a human!? all I am saying is why complain about having to muzzle your dog if it did become illegal if it helps to stop vicious dogs being able to do things like this. My dog isn't vicious towards people but I would muzzle him if it helps to stop things like this. How would you muzzling your dog stop some idiot taking his aggressive dog out and it biting someone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libuse Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 wait no longer newbiz - I answered previously - those that were not bred for power, jaw strength and aggression - keep up matey, it's not rocket science. So, by your rationale, anyone who owns a lurcher is "personally/sexually inadequate"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 you said that some dogs are more intelligent than their owners didn't you? if the cap fits ..... No :huh::huh: Originally Posted by MrSmith View Post Most dogs are more pleasant, tolerant and intelligent than some humans and if you are attacked the chances are it won’t be a dog, it will be a human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewBiz Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 So, by your rationale, anyone who owns a lurcher is "personally/sexually inadequate"? You will find that Frank tends to write a lot of piffle, so best get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.