Rottweiler and kids?

CFC

Rottweilers are the number 2 breed in terms of fatal attacks on humans. Topping the list of deaths by dog in a twenty year period is the Pit Bull and Pit Bull mix at 66 human deaths. The Rottweiler and Rottweiler mix was responsible for 39 human deaths.


Kind of says it all. In the Netherlands, for example, they are classed as dangerous dogs, and they are banned in some countries.

Stormgirl, why don't you go and and get a vocabulary instead of another Rottweiler, then you wouldn't have to post in capitals and swear on a public forum to express yourself.

Council estates are awash with the breed. I live on one and the number of them in the area has to be seen to be believed.

Again, I say, there are sensible animals to be had as a family pet, that are more controllable and less risky when out of control. The Rottweiler has a greater bite strength than the American Pit Bull Terrier, and those animals indeed fall under the Dangerous Dogs Act. In my opinion it is a pity that Rottweilers currently do not. I know that the Kennel Club takes a policy of Deed not Breed, however as a special interest group rather than a public interest group, they would.

Only in January this year a child died due to a Rottweiler attack. In the same month, an elderly man was savaged by his Rottweiler,and died. That's not counting the people who have been scarred for life or seriously injured by these animals. In 2007 there were similar incidents. That's just in this country alone.

You all appear to have short memories?

I applaud Dublin City Council's initiative, although their selection criteria for dogs seems a little random for some of the breeds listed. I hope it makes its way to England. It's a good First Step.

(It may well be true, that the worst dog in the world will behave with the absolutely right owner, but let's face it, there are few of those top class owners around in comparison to the number of Rottweilers, although doubtless everyone in the world who owns one thinks that they are one of the top, good responsible owners. Until their dog kills or injures someone, of course).

QED.

mirrorimage0

no one denies that they can be dangerous dogs just like any dog can be, and yes they do have more strenght than most, i believe what people did not appreciate were being called chavs and made to sound like unfit dog owners.

gomer

CFC wrote: »

Rottweilers are the number 2 breed in terms of fatal attacks on humans. Topping the list of deaths by dog in a twenty year period is the Pit Bull and Pit Bull mix at 66 human deaths. The Rottweiler and Rottweiler mix was responsible for 39 human deaths.


Kind of says it all. In the Netherlands, for example, they are classed as dangerous dogs, and they are banned in some countries.

Stormgirl, why don't you go and and get a vocabulary instead of another Rottweiler, then you wouldn't have to post in capitals and swear on a public forum to express yourself.

Council estates are awash with the breed. I live on one and the number of them in the area has to be seen to be believed.

Again, I say, there are sensible animals to be had as a family pet, that are more controllable and less risky when out of control. The Rottweiler has a greater bite strength than the American Pit Bull Terrier, and those animals indeed fall under the Dangerous Dogs Act. In my opinion it is a pity that Rottweilers currently do not. I know that the Kennel Club takes a policy of Deed not Breed, however as a special interest group rather than a public interest group, they would.

Only in January this year a child died due to a Rottweiler attack. In the same month, an elderly man was savaged by his Rottweiler,and died. That's not counting the people who have been scarred for life or seriously injured by these animals. In 2007 there were similar incidents. That's just in this country alone.

You all appear to have short memories?

I applaud Dublin City Council's initiative, although their selection criteria for dogs seems a little random for some of the breeds listed. I hope it makes its way to England. It's a good First Step.

(It may well be true, that the worst dog in the world will behave with the absolutely right owner, but let's face it, there are few of those top class owners around in comparison to the number of Rottweilers, although doubtless everyone in the world who owns one thinks that they are one of the top, good responsible owners. Until their dog kills or injures someone, of course).

QED.

Why is it always the people who know sod all about the breed who have to throw statistics about & claim to know so many 'facts', but don't seem to be able to provide any & instead just quote the rubbish they read in the News Of The World? We do not have short memories, we just prefer to stick to the facts instead of listening to sensationalist & prejudiced rubbish about Rottweiler owners being chavs & council estates being awash with Rottweilers. Come on then, if you are basing your assumptions on 'fact' can you name which council estates are flooded with Rottweilers? I bet you can't can you?

1) Rottweilers are NOT number 2 on the list for fatal attacks - check your facts before talking such rubbish. They are actually in the top 5 most popular pet dogs & have been for the last 3 decades, which is testament to thier stable & reliable nature as a family pet, as always it is human stupidity that causes the problems associated with the breed, and as for Rottweilers having a stronger bite pressure than a Pitt Bull, you seem to be forgetting one rather important biological fact - Pitt Bulls can lock thier jaw thus increasing the bite pressure to breaking point - Rottweilers cant, do i have to spell that one out for you as well?

2) Council estates are NOT awash with Rottweilers, now that really was an ignorant thing to say, if anything it would be fairer to say the streets were awash with Staffordshire Bull Terriers - so now it's council tenants as well as Chavs who own Rottweilers?

3) In january this year a child was left unattended with a Rottweiler that had only been brought into the home a few months previously after being perchased in a pub with no knowledge of it's history other than it was a 'guard dog', it was NOT a family pet and was bought specifically to guard the house after a burglary. Even the adults living in the house were so afraid of the dog in question that it was never allowed inside the house, hardly your typical well raised Rottweiler & they didn't even trust it around adults but they were quite happy to leave children unattended with it. Go figure!

4) Also in january this year an old man was NOT savaged by his own dog, it's exactly that sort of inaccurate reporting that causes most of the problems, he had a stroke in the street and the dog was trying to get his owner up off the floor - dogs don't have hands - how else do you expect an animal to try and rescue it's bloody owner? The dog was doing it's job by trying to protect & save it's owner AFTER he collapsed in the street & it was shot dead for being so loyal. Why do you think that might be? Because some ignorant idiot phoned the police screaming that a man was having his face 'eaten off' & being savaged by his own dog, when that was not actually the case at all, as was later proven by the pathologist who clearly stated that the man did not have any injuries consistant with a dog attack, which was hardly surprising considering the dog was wearing a muzzle at the time (and you think we have short memories?), he had died from natural causes after having a stroke, you'd expect someone who had just been savaged to death by thier own dog to have at least one or two bite marks on thier body wouldn't you? But hey don't let the facts get in the way of a good story eh?!!

5) Remember the case of 5 month old Cadey-Lee Deacon who died after being 'savaged' by Rottweilers above her family's pub in Leicester? Did you read the pathologists report on that one? I did & guess what? She didn't die as a result of being mauled to death either, she died after being accidently dropped on the floor by the dog after it lifted her from the bed, the cause of death was shock from the impact of being dropped - NOT from being mauled to death by the dogs. Can you see a pattern developing here? It's called media bias, distorting the facts to sell a story because 'baby accidently dropped by dog', or 'Dog tries to save dying owner' doesn't sell papers! If you are going to use recent 'attacks' to justify your prejudice & ignorance then at least check your facts and read the pathologist reports that accompany each of these stories, i have, and i always do whenever i hear of one of these stories because pathologists reports do not lie, unlike some of the tabloids who make a living from distorting the facts.

6) Then of course there was the case of 9 year old Chloe Grayson from Sheffield who was 'savaged' by a Rottweiler that went on the 'rampage' at a party in a neighbour's house, remember all the stories about how the dog sank it's teeth into her head and tore her face open without warning? When the case went to court a vet & other professionals had examined the wounds beforehand & confirmed that the injuries could not have been caused by the dog's teeth because they were not teeth marks, the dog had instead 'pawed' at her face & accidently clawed her, but that didn't stop her parents from encouraging her to appear on the national news giggling like it was all a joke while insisting she wanted the dog put to sleep & all Rottweilers banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 'because mummy said so'. I'm sure the owner of the dog didn't find it very funny when his dog was falsely accused of attacking a child & nearly got put to sleep. Thankfully common sense prevailed and the dog was granted a reprieve from death row and returned to it's owner because a court of law agreed that it had not launched a savage unprovoked 'attack' and had NOT bitten anyone.

7) You seem to have completely overlooked the fact that most of the people condemning the irresponsible actions of the person in the OP are all Rottweiler owners & are all horrified at the thought of an 11 year old child being allowed to walk one unattended because they have enough bad press already without that sort of stupidity. Nobody doubts that the breed is in a lot of trouble these days & it is up to responsible owners like us to challenge the kind of ignorance we face every day displayed by people like you.

8) The rest of the rubbish you came out with was so ignorant that it wasn't worth bothering with.

MrsTinks

I'm as I have said not a chav and nor am I a council estate tenant (not that I have anything against them - just making a point here ) and the second I have a large enough house and garden for a second dog we will be looking at a rottie. DH grew up with them and I know many very well and whilst I have the utmost respect for them then I also know they are one of the most misunderstood breeds! They get bad press because they are big. The MOST likely dogs that will bite you are in fact smaller dogs, but because it's "cute" it's never addressed! Ask any professional dog trainer which dog breed has bitten them the most times and I'll be it's a below the knee height breed!

Even if your facts and figures are right (which I doubt) then 39 deaths, whilst of course tragic, is really not great is it? There are more horse related deaths and of course lets not forget stabbings, shootings, road deaths and so on. If any "breed" should be on the register it should surely the the homosapiens and not canines?

Do some dogs become unpredictable? Probably. Do any become dangerous as a direct result of the actions of their owners? ABSOLUTELY!

PUNISH THE DEED, NOT THE BREED!

gomer

Even a single death is one too many but when you consider that there are tens of thousands of Rottweilers living as family pets in the UK alone, then 39 deaths slightly pales into insignificance & hardly warrants the level of scaremongering applied to it when more children are murdered by thier own parents every week.

MrsTinks

don't forget those figures (if correct!) are for last 20 years...

gomer

Precisely, more children are killed by thier parents or die in road traffic accidents in a single week than have been killed by a Rottweiler in 20 years. It's all well & good throwing statistics about to bolster an argument but the fact is statistically or otherwise the ratio of death's from Rottweiler attacks are at the bottom of the list compared to any other cause of death.

When you consider the fact that there are tens of thousands of Rottweilers living as family pets in the UK, you'd expect a hell of a lot more deaths than 39 (most of which were not the fault of the dog anyway), as was the case in both 'attacks' in January this year.

orlao

CFC wrote: »

I applaud Dublin City Council's initiative, although their selection criteria for dogs seems a little random for some of the breeds listed. I hope it makes its way to England. It's a good First Step.


QED.

As a Dubliner, although not resident there anymore, I visit 3 or 4 times a year...so still quite aware of what things are like there....Ireland is a very anti pet country and Dublin is not at all animal friendly.....most public open spaces (the few that are left!) are barred to dogs, The irish equivalent of the DDA is very strict, the criteria for special controls on dogs is based on their weight, any dog over 25 or 30kgs, sorry not sure which MUST be muzzled in public and always on a lead.....that's an awful lot of dogs. Still think that's a good first step? Especially if you have an elderly lab, BC or boxer that has put on a bit of weight....you'd have a hard time getting them to a healthy weight with those restrictions on exercise!

Again the anti dog lobby use their powers against the people who as non home owners are forced to give up the dogs that they homed in good faith, remember that this rule was retrospective....when tenants got their dogs it was permitted to have ANY dog breed you wished but then they were told to "lose the dog or lose your home" Still a good first step? All Dublin CC had to do was ban any new dogs being acquired......the problem would have been solved within a decade, not a huge amount of time when you take everything into consideration really!

Ask any Dublin vet if it was a good idea? They had to PTS thousands of healthy dogs that had never put a paw out of place.
Also, ask yourself if you would like to be so restricted that you couldn't walk your dogs off lead or in 90% of public places. I'm assuming that as a MSEr posting on the pet board that you are both a pet owner and have an interest in how your tax money is spent and would like to benefit from the facilities that local councils provide or not as the case may be. That's what it's like to live in urban Ireland with dogs.

karenn_3

CFC wrote: »

Rottweilers are the number 2 breed in terms of fatal attacks on humans. Topping the list of deaths by dog in a twenty year period is the Pit Bull and Pit Bull mix at 66 human deaths. The Rottweiler and Rottweiler mix was responsible for 39 human deaths.


Kind of says it all. In the Netherlands, for example, they are classed as dangerous dogs, and they are banned in some countries.

Stormgirl, why don't you go and and get a vocabulary instead of another Rottweiler, then you wouldn't have to post in capitals and swear on a public forum to express yourself.

Council estates are awash with the breed. I live on one and the number of them in the area has to be seen to be believed.

Again, I say, there are sensible animals to be had as a family pet, that are more controllable and less risky when out of control. The Rottweiler has a greater bite strength than the American Pit Bull Terrier, and those animals indeed fall under the Dangerous Dogs Act. In my opinion it is a pity that Rottweilers currently do not. I know that the Kennel Club takes a policy of Deed not Breed, however as a special interest group rather than a public interest group, they would.

Only in January this year a child died due to a Rottweiler attack. In the same month, an elderly man was savaged by his Rottweiler,and died. That's not counting the people who have been scarred for life or seriously injured by these animals. In 2007 there were similar incidents. That's just in this country alone.

You all appear to have short memories?


QED.

and you appear to believe everything you read :cool:

tiamai_d

Wonder if the OP has had any progress?

I would report to the police that a child is walking a dog that is far too large for her to control and that there has been an incident.

I think it's about all you can do and you can keep annonymus doing it.

Oh and I am glad I had two rotweillers when 6 month's pregnant a drunken council worker tried to force his way into my parents home one night I was house sitting. He was adament that he was coming in to fix a leaky shower (we didn't have a shower and he was from a different local authority). It was only after his foot was in in the door and I realised I couln't push him out that I stepped aside to reveal two very silent rotweillers that he backed off.

So to me, rotweillers - good, poodles- spawn of satan. And gosh, I'm not even a chav neither!!

And also (again) I could spout off statisticts about how many children were attacked by poodles (666 in the past 3 years) but if I don't put down my source, who is going to beleive me?