Which breed of dog would you classify as dangerous?

Oliver14

Person_one wrote: »

It really bothers me that small dogs get such a bad press just because they happen to be small.

They're just dogs, size doesn't mean anything. If I said these kinds of things about all big dogs I would (rightly) be jumped on for it and told exactly why my generalising was wrong and prejudiced.

Someone told me the other day that they hated 'snappy little rat dogs' as I was stood there with my two under 10kg behaving perfectly.

If it was medium sized dogs that went for your springer I'd bet good money you wouldn't start crossing the road to avoid all medium sized dogs.

I get your point and do agree with a lot of points and it's great that you have such well trained dogs.

My dog trainer who at present is helping me with my mad Labrador runs numerous classes and does numerous one on one training. While working with my lab we frequently discuss dog behaviour and training. Her observations which from my experience I agree with is as much as there are badly trained dogs of all sizes there seems to be more in the smaller category. Her theory (which is one I have heard numerous times) is because of their size a lot of owners rather than train them correctly if something happens or the dog doesn't do what they want they are more likely to pick it up rather than try and continue with the training, which you cant really do with a 35kg Golden Retriever. Yes it's an observation and it can't be proven but I would agree. In my personal experience in walking both my dogs the dogs that are more likely to threaten or try and attack mine are likely to be the smaller breeds like terriers and Jack Russells.

Yes there are badly trained dogs of all sizes and this is just an observation. Another thing I have observed recently is a glut of people buying Sled dogs such as Malamutes and Husky's and being unable to train them properly and give them enough exercise. There are a couple of people I see around frequently at the monment being taken for a walk by their Malamutes,

lisawood78

meerkat2007 wrote: »

A dangerous owner.

This... x10.


I own heading on for 30 stone of dog (over 3 dogs) in the wrong hands they could be made very dangerous. But nope, they are placid and docile (of course I don't take this for granted however!)

orlao

mark88man wrote: »

*There are dogs that are bred with aggressive tendencies *
* It does not mean the breeed is dangerous *

being from a breed that is "bred for aggression" exactly means "that breed is dangerous"

I am very tired of listening to the doggie danger apologists - I think you need to be honest and say there is always danger.

I'm not trying to protect the world from dangerous stuff - just I hate all the fluffiness and willfull disbelief.

TBF, very few breeds are bred for aggression - some are 'guarding' breeds which, in my book is very different as any responsible owner will tell you. If you have a guarding breed you train and channel it and it is no more dangerous that any other dog unless you break into it's home!

Tina20 wrote: »

Jack russells, in my experience are extremely dangerous. Have you seen a terrier with a rat? They are designed to kill, to clamp on and shake till the target is dead. Sure, you can get some lovely ones but I've known of at least 3 human-aggressive JRT's personally, one which tore apart a woman's leg so she can no longer walk without a stick.

So the theory of 'smaller= less dangerous' is a load of rubbish.

I have a rottie and she is the most sweet loving, gentle dog I have ever kept or met.

I also have a rottweiler - and a JRT. The terrier is a middle aged rescue and I will freely admit he's a little sod with other dogs so he's muzzled when he's out. However, with people he's lovely and all my previous JRTs have been obedient and safe round livestock, poultry, people and other dogs. I have to say that they were much harder to train than the rottie, he was a doddle to deal with compared to the terrors!

Oliver14 wrote: »

I get your point and do agree with a lot of points and it's great that you have such well trained dogs.

My dog trainer who at present is helping me with my mad Labrador runs numerous classes and does numerous one on one training. While working with my lab we frequently discuss dog behaviour and training. Her observations which from my experience I agree with is as much as there are badly trained dogs of all sizes there seems to be more in the smaller category. Her theory (which is one I have heard numerous times) is because of their size a lot of owners rather than train them correctly if something happens or the dog doesn't do what they want they are more likely to pick it up rather than try and continue with the training, which you cant really do with a 35kg Golden Retriever. Yes it's an observation and it can't be proven but I would agree. In my personal experience in walking both my dogs the dogs that are more likely to threaten or try and attack mine are likely to be the smaller breeds like terriers and Jack Russells.

(my bolding)

I couldn't agree with you more plus the mistake that people make of thinking that a little dog won't need much exercise or stimulation. Terriers were bred to work, often independently (down holes or ratting in barns) and as a result they tend to be fiesty with BIG egos and if not channelled properly that ego can make them obnoxious. In saying that I had the JRT who was scared of rabbits, the dark, water and really was happier if she could persuade people to carry her. Both her parents were true working terriers, she was an anomaly. My other girl was a top notch worker, was regularly invited to clear barns and in her hey day got at least one rabbit a day. Both were house dogs who very much enjoyed their home comforts and who could and were taken pretty much anywhere. Oh and neither they or my present dog were yappy.

Back on topic I wouldn't consider any of my 4 dogs above dangerous to people or other dogs mainly because they are/were under control at all times. Sadly, there are a huge amount of dog owners who don't control their dogs properly which raises the risk to others - what to do about it? I really think there needs to be a culture change where training your dog becomes the norm rather than waiting until you have problems and complaints. After all a flexi lead is not a replacement for a decent recall, is it?

Again IMHO, non dog owners need to relax a little and stop viewing every canine as a 'lean, mean, killing machine' - while every dog bite/injury is a shame the statistics prove that cars (controlled by humans, just like dogs) are much more likely to kill or injure you or your family and I doubt that even Vax would demand that all cars of a certain type or size should be banned from the road...

sparrer

Oliver14 wrote: »

I'm not saying you are lying but there would have been some trigger even if it was not obvious. Dogs do not attack for no reason there is always a reason even if it's not obvious.

Thank you, rewarding to know I am not thought of as a 'liar'. The situation was as follows -

I was sitting in my lounge with my mother who had my then 2 year old daughter on her lap. The 6 year-old dog was lying, asleep I thought, in her usual place behind the sofa. My mother was reading a book to my daughter who was almost asleep. Without provocation the dog got up and walked, not ran, toward my mother, then growled, grabbed my daughter's hand and refused to let go. Daughter later had 13 stitches in the wounds. (She bears the scars today).

There was no unusual incident, no sudden noise, nothing to scare the dog, daughter was quietly enjoying a cuddle. When we took the dog to the vet he did a thorough check-up and found nothing wrong, nothing that could have caused the dog any irritation or pain.

While I fully agree there is usually provocation, we, and the vet, had no solution to what happened..

robocop

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeR9rCawP-Y

cheepskate_2

Not read all the replys BUT vax, maybe you should watch the dog whisperer.

\Watch his 2 big pits, get abused by people's like you, who's dogs are non-aggressive breeds and never retaliate., the same people like you that like to pass judgement on dogs, while sitting in their glass houses with "now my breed of dog",

Bigger dogs in general will do more damage due to their size(apart from those blinking little jack russells). Your springer will do more damage than my little one...........But i am more aware that its how owners bring their dogs up anddont just think mine will be ok cos its a springer

meritaten

vax2002 wrote: »

a staffie is not a breed, its a term for a Mongrel based loosely in on the Staffordshire bull terrier, most would fail the breed standard.
It sounds better than blue nosed pitbul cross.

it ISNT a breed???????????? shock! then how do pedigree Staffordshire Bull Terriers have a Class at Crufts? perhaps you had better inform the Kennel Club as they have been harbouring mongrels in thier midst!

Staffie is the affectionate term for the Breed just as 'Labs' is for Labradors and 'Cockers' is for Cocker Spaniels!
Jeeeeez - not all pedigree dogs actually meet the standard enough to display at crufts - which is why most of them are pets!
my own Staffie had impeccabale lineage - yet was too tall to compete at crufts - for a female.

faerie~spangles

Person_one wrote: »

One of my two reacts nervously to completely black dogs (of any breed), I keep him away from them completely. I've read that its because its harder for them to read their expressions/body language due to the eyes and nose being sort of 'hidden' by the black fur.

So its probably not completely random.

Aren't you projecting your fears?



Precious eejits with untrained, unsociable dogs don't seem to get it.:A

Person_one

faerie~spangles wrote: »

Aren't you projecting your fears?



Precious eejits with untrained, unsociable dogs don't seem to get it.:A

You think I'm scared of black dogs? Or maybe I'm scared of people wearing black...OMG!! I'm wearing black today!!!:eek:

My dog was untrained and unsocialised when he came to me, yes, he's a middle aged rescue on his fifth owner and he had a lot of issues!

Please remember that some dogs with behavioural problems have owners who aren't responsible for causing them but are trying really hard to resolve them, and it can be a slow process!

Person_one

meritaten wrote: »

it ISNT a breed???????????? shock! then how do pedigree Staffordshire Bull Terriers have a Class at Crufts? perhaps you had better inform the Kennel Club as they have been harbouring mongrels in thier midst!

Staffie is the affectionate term for the Breed just as 'Labs' is for Labradors and 'Cockers' is for Cocker Spaniels!
Jeeeeez - not all pedigree dogs actually meet the standard enough to display at crufts - which is why most of them are pets!
my own Staffie had impeccabale lineage - yet was too tall to compete at crufts - for a female.

People try to tell him this every time he brings it up, but he'll ignore it and on the next thread even vaguely to do with Staffies or dangerous dogs he'll trot out the whole ridiculous theory again.

Its pretty amateur trolling, I wouldn't bother trying to reason with it!