Dangerous Dogs
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
The fact is no dog is safe to be left in a room on its own with a child, no matter how small and fluffy the dog is, no matter how much of a loving family pet it is, no matter how daft as a brush it is. Dogs can turn in a split second and there is no predicting it or saying it will never happen with my dog. Saying ban Rottweilers is ridiculous (as daft as those saying ban TG hey UB
) Attacks from dogs will continue to happen regardless of the breed. Yes some attacks can be avoided and this one should have been through responsible parenting.
I volunteered at a dog home a few years back while on gardening leave for a job and the background to some of the dogs while I was working there was quite disturbing. What you regard as a 'safe' breed can be quite the opposite, there is no safe breed. The worst dog they had in was a golden labrador. Usually a great pet (my parents had one when I was a kid and I loved it to bits) and it was there as it had ripped the face off its owner, not just a bad bite but literally ripped the guys face off. It should have been destroyed in my opinion but for what ever reason the owner had decided to have it rehomed and not put down. His mistake? He rubbed its ears and this was the trigger for its savage attack. The point here is that Dogs can be triggered by the most innocuous of events and you wont know about that trigger until it happens. There is no such thing as a safe dog around babies/children.
![Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)](images/smilies/rolleyes.gif)
I volunteered at a dog home a few years back while on gardening leave for a job and the background to some of the dogs while I was working there was quite disturbing. What you regard as a 'safe' breed can be quite the opposite, there is no safe breed. The worst dog they had in was a golden labrador. Usually a great pet (my parents had one when I was a kid and I loved it to bits) and it was there as it had ripped the face off its owner, not just a bad bite but literally ripped the guys face off. It should have been destroyed in my opinion but for what ever reason the owner had decided to have it rehomed and not put down. His mistake? He rubbed its ears and this was the trigger for its savage attack. The point here is that Dogs can be triggered by the most innocuous of events and you wont know about that trigger until it happens. There is no such thing as a safe dog around babies/children.
#62
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by davegtt
Put down all black dogs ![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
For all you religious fanatics out there!
![Thumb](images/smilies/thumb.gif)
Ns04
Sorry, couldn't resist!!
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
And before anyone complains
1) I'm joking
2) My last dog was black..............and he died of old age!!
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
3) I detest fanatics equally regardless of which religion they profane!
4) I've not yet had my 2nd cuppa of the day so don't really give sh*t!
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 25 September 2006 at 02:46 PM.
#63
![Wink](images/icons/icon12.gif)
Originally Posted by New_scooby_04
Behead all black dogs
For all you religious fanatics out there!
Ns04
Sorry, couldn't resist!!![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
For all you religious fanatics out there!
![Thumb](images/smilies/thumb.gif)
Ns04
Sorry, couldn't resist!!
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Razz](images/smilies/razz.gif)
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
#64
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by SJ_Skyline
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Ns04
PS killed by a Cocker Spaniel?? Poor basta*d, was he licked to death????
![Lol1](images/smilies/lol1.gif)
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
#65
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: www.tiovicente.com
Posts: 2,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Norman D. Landing
A matter of opinion but hey we've all got one so fair enough.
So by that reasoning, just because Rover's great Grandad was in the proximity of humans 40 years ago, then Rover shouldn't be biting us now? I'm afraid that Rover is still biting !
Apologies for the formatting but this was a cut of a PDF table, but heres a start. Dog bite related deaths in Breed order (Taken from http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf Canadian study but I'm sure it cant be far from relevant for most countries?)
Death-based approach Dog-based approach
Breed Purebred Crossbred Total Purebred Crossbred Total
Pit bull-type 66 11* 76* 98 20 118
Rottweiler 39 6* 44* 60 7 67
German Shepherd Dog 17 11* 27* 24 17 41
Husky-type (includes at least 2 Siberian) 15 6 21 15 6 21
Malamute 12 3 15 13 3 16
Wolf-dog hybrid 0 14 14 0 15 15
Mixed-breed (NOS) 0 12 12 0 47 47
Chow Chow 8 3 11 8 13 21
Doberman 9 1 10 12 1 13
Saint Bernard 7 1 8 7 1 8
Great Dane 7 1* 7* 11 2 13
Labrador Retriever 1 4 5 1 7 8
Akita 4 0 4 4 0 4
Sled-type (NOS) 3 0 3 12 0 12
Bulldog 2 1 3 2 1 3
Mastiff 2 1 3 4 1 5
Boxer 2 1 3 4 1 5
Collie 0 3 3 0 6 6
Bullmastiff 1 1 2 1 1 2
Hound-type (NOS) 1 1 2 1 1 2
Retriever-type (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Chesapeake Bay Retriever 1 0 1 1 0 1
West Highland Terrier (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Terrier-type (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Japanese Hunting Dog (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Newfoundland 1 0 1 1 0 1
Coonhound 1 0 1 1 0 1
Sheepdog (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Australian Shepherd 0 1 1 0 3 3
Rhodesian Ridgeback 1 0 1 1 0 1
Cocker Spaniel 1 0 1 1 0 1
*A purebred dog and a crossbred dog of this breed were involved in a single fatality; therefore, that breed is counted only
once in the total column.
Doesn't seem flawed, nor unworkable. Again this is only my opinion.
Licensing dog ownership to prevent these situation cropping up again and again has surely got to be better than doing nothing and hoping?
So by that reasoning, just because Rover's great Grandad was in the proximity of humans 40 years ago, then Rover shouldn't be biting us now? I'm afraid that Rover is still biting !
Apologies for the formatting but this was a cut of a PDF table, but heres a start. Dog bite related deaths in Breed order (Taken from http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf Canadian study but I'm sure it cant be far from relevant for most countries?)
Death-based approach Dog-based approach
Breed Purebred Crossbred Total Purebred Crossbred Total
Pit bull-type 66 11* 76* 98 20 118
Rottweiler 39 6* 44* 60 7 67
German Shepherd Dog 17 11* 27* 24 17 41
Husky-type (includes at least 2 Siberian) 15 6 21 15 6 21
Malamute 12 3 15 13 3 16
Wolf-dog hybrid 0 14 14 0 15 15
Mixed-breed (NOS) 0 12 12 0 47 47
Chow Chow 8 3 11 8 13 21
Doberman 9 1 10 12 1 13
Saint Bernard 7 1 8 7 1 8
Great Dane 7 1* 7* 11 2 13
Labrador Retriever 1 4 5 1 7 8
Akita 4 0 4 4 0 4
Sled-type (NOS) 3 0 3 12 0 12
Bulldog 2 1 3 2 1 3
Mastiff 2 1 3 4 1 5
Boxer 2 1 3 4 1 5
Collie 0 3 3 0 6 6
Bullmastiff 1 1 2 1 1 2
Hound-type (NOS) 1 1 2 1 1 2
Retriever-type (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Chesapeake Bay Retriever 1 0 1 1 0 1
West Highland Terrier (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Terrier-type (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Japanese Hunting Dog (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Newfoundland 1 0 1 1 0 1
Coonhound 1 0 1 1 0 1
Sheepdog (NOS) 1 0 1 1 0 1
Australian Shepherd 0 1 1 0 3 3
Rhodesian Ridgeback 1 0 1 1 0 1
Cocker Spaniel 1 0 1 1 0 1
*A purebred dog and a crossbred dog of this breed were involved in a single fatality; therefore, that breed is counted only
once in the total column.
Doesn't seem flawed, nor unworkable. Again this is only my opinion.
Licensing dog ownership to prevent these situation cropping up again and again has surely got to be better than doing nothing and hoping?
As I said at the beginning, license the owners not the dog. It sounds to me as if these dogs weren't properly socialised, poorly trained and shouldn't have been left alone with a child.
As for your analogy about wild animals and dogs - it's crap because comparing a domesticated animal with a feral one doesn't equate. Surely you can see that?
At the end of the day, we're talking about an extremely slim chance of being attacked by a dog and yet the Daily Mail loonies are getting uptight about something that rarely happens.
![Cuckoo](images/smilies/cuckoo.gif)
#66
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Bring back the Dog licence and charge people through the nose to own any dog.
That should stop the Chavs from getting them.
Next - Behead all Daily Mail Readers and then the rest of us can get on with living our own lives without interference from someone who "knows" better.
That should stop the Chavs from getting them.
Next - Behead all Daily Mail Readers and then the rest of us can get on with living our own lives without interference from someone who "knows" better.
#67
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: In a V6 Mercedes
Posts: 2,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Saxo Boy
F*ck you Rob - where have i professed ANYWHERE in this thread to being a dog expert!!! I think you'll find half my posts have been questions and my statement that a liscensing system is needed requires know knowledge of the species of dogs but rather an understanding that there clearing is a problem.
![Lol1](images/smilies/lol1.gif)
Rob
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Infractions - Scoobynet's version of the "scamera" van
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Personally, I'd be more worried about Muslims.
I'm sure the statistics will show that more people have been murdered or intentionally injured by Muslims in the uk in recent years than have been killed by Rottweilers.
Anyway, it seems there is more to this story than those all to quick to jump on the bandwagon have taken into account
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...544057,00.html
I'm sure the statistics will show that more people have been murdered or intentionally injured by Muslims in the uk in recent years than have been killed by Rottweilers.
Anyway, it seems there is more to this story than those all to quick to jump on the bandwagon have taken into account
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...544057,00.html
#69
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
I have a Staffie, and as most owners will tell you they are very soft and good natured. I've had him in the close contact with small toddlers and he's been fine with them.
However, I'd never leave him alone in a room with a toddler or baby, just in case. A) I wouldn't be able to live with the guilt of him biting a young child, and B) I'd have to put him down.
Dogs aren't dangerous, It's the owners that make them dangerous.
However, I'd never leave him alone in a room with a toddler or baby, just in case. A) I wouldn't be able to live with the guilt of him biting a young child, and B) I'd have to put him down.
Dogs aren't dangerous, It's the owners that make them dangerous.
#70
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by jasey
Bring back the Dog licence and charge people through the nose to own any dog.
That should stop the Chavs from getting them.
That should stop the Chavs from getting them.
Most pedigree dogs will set you back over £500 these days, if they can find that, they'll find the money for a licence.
#71
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by scoobfan
Charming !
Rob
![Lol1](images/smilies/lol1.gif)
Rob
![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
#72
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Next door to the WiFi connection
Posts: 16,293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Not forgetting the way dogs are sold, its so easy to get hold of any type of dog, it doesnt take much to pick up the ad mag etc, there is a big monthly magazine which name escapes me, basically you can buy anything from it and its full of rare breeds of dogs every month. You wouldnt need a licence to go pick up an unregistered dog etc.
#73
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 6,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by OllyK
Not really because you have to police it, and the police can't seem to cope with all the other legislation that has been brought in, especially if it involves getting out from behind a CCTV VDU, speed camera or doghnut van.
Most pedigree dogs will set you back over £500 these days, if they can find that, they'll find the money for a licence.
Most pedigree dogs will set you back over £500 these days, if they can find that, they'll find the money for a licence.
Make the LIcence £2,000. Make the fine for not having one £3,000. Use the money to fund more scamera vans
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
![Mad](images/smilies/mad.gif)
It's right up the street of modern policing
#74
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lancs / Manc
Posts: 534
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#76
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Flatcapdriver
Another example of your flawed thinking at work here.
You seem to be very defensive about this, oh, hang on, I'm supposed to put a
![Cuckoo](images/smilies/cuckoo.gif)
Originally Posted by Flatcapdriver
As I said at the beginning, license the owners not the dog
By all means, get yourself a Rottweiller but be prepared to pay for the privillege. Hopefully this should mean that your average nutcase who cannot afford it, wont !
This of course would have to be implemented in an 'All dogs must be chipped' scheme. Surely nobody can have an objection to that?
#77
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
I agree with anything that would stop scummy chavs buying dogs as accessories to boost their pathetic ego's. These sort of people encourage the dogs to be "hard" which isn't sending the animal the right message straight away.
Similar to the way the chav scum themselves are brought up.
Similar to the way the chav scum themselves are brought up.
#78
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Infractions - Scoobynet's version of the "scamera" van
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Norman D. Landing
Thats exactly what I suggested in the first place ! I said '"Dog ownership should be licensed ", I did not say "Dogs should be licensed". As an addendum I suggested that the license fee should be tiered so that breeds which are generally accepted to be more dangerous to others be more expensive to keep as a deterrant.
By all means, get yourself a Rottweiller but be prepared to pay for the privillege. Hopefully this should mean that your average nutcase who cannot afford it, wont !
This of course would have to be implemented in an 'All dogs must be chipped' scheme. Surely nobody can have an objection to that?
![Thumb](images/smilies/thumb.gif)
#79
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: In a V6 Mercedes
Posts: 2,327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by ///\oo/\\\
Personally, I'd be more worried about Muslims.
I'm sure the statistics will show that more people have been murdered or intentionally injured by Muslims in the uk in recent years than have been killed by Rottweilers.
Anyway, it seems there is more to this story than those all to quick to jump on the bandwagon have taken into account
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...544057,00.html
I'm sure the statistics will show that more people have been murdered or intentionally injured by Muslims in the uk in recent years than have been killed by Rottweilers.
Anyway, it seems there is more to this story than those all to quick to jump on the bandwagon have taken into account
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...544057,00.html
![Big Grin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Rob
#80
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: www.tiovicente.com
Posts: 2,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Norman D. Landing
Oh dear, here we go. It's not 'my thinking' I merely found the information and pasted it here as an example of a sliding scalse of how breeds can be rated, in this case according to number of deaths related to breed. You did ask how it could be done so I did what you asked, it's only one example, there will be more and probably better examples.
You seem to be very defensive about this, oh, hang on, I'm supposed to put a
here aren't I ?
Thats exactly what I suggested in the first place ! I said '"Dog ownership should be licensed ", I did not say "Dogs should be licensed". As an addendum I suggested that the license fee should be tiered so that breeds which are generally accepted to be more dangerous to others be more expensive to keep as a deterrant.
By all means, get yourself a Rottweiller but be prepared to pay for the privillege. Hopefully this should mean that your average nutcase who cannot afford it, wont !
This of course would have to be implemented in an 'All dogs must be chipped' scheme. Surely nobody can have an objection to that?
You seem to be very defensive about this, oh, hang on, I'm supposed to put a
![Cuckoo](images/smilies/cuckoo.gif)
Thats exactly what I suggested in the first place ! I said '"Dog ownership should be licensed ", I did not say "Dogs should be licensed". As an addendum I suggested that the license fee should be tiered so that breeds which are generally accepted to be more dangerous to others be more expensive to keep as a deterrant.
By all means, get yourself a Rottweiller but be prepared to pay for the privillege. Hopefully this should mean that your average nutcase who cannot afford it, wont !
This of course would have to be implemented in an 'All dogs must be chipped' scheme. Surely nobody can have an objection to that?
You can't just take that list and assume that its correct. It doesn't take into account the population of each breed, the total dog population nor any other environmental data so you can hardly pin your grand scheme on that set of figures. There's no information about provocation (yes it does happen), nor is there any information about events leading up to the attack so with so little data, it's impossible to formulate any plan based on such evidence.
People should be licensed, not the dog. Licensing, training for both owner and dog as well as any breeder who should be carrying out a decent vetting scheme.
Lastly, I think you're confused between the concept of being 'defensive' and 'offensive'.
#82
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Flatcapdriver
Strewth, you are hard work. I suggested licensing long before you got involved in the debate and all you came up with was a copy and paste job, not an explanation of how to rank various breeds' susceptibility to attacking humans.
You can't just take that list and assume that its correct. It doesn't take into account the population of each breed, the total dog population nor any other environmental data so you can hardly pin your grand scheme on that set of figures. There's no information about provocation (yes it does happen), nor is there any information about events leading up to the attack so with so little data, it's impossible to formulate any plan based on such evidence.
People should be licensed, not the dog. Licensing, training for both owner and dog as well as any breeder who should be carrying out a decent vetting scheme.
Lastly, I think you're confused between the concept of being 'defensive' and 'offensive'.
You can't just take that list and assume that its correct. It doesn't take into account the population of each breed, the total dog population nor any other environmental data so you can hardly pin your grand scheme on that set of figures. There's no information about provocation (yes it does happen), nor is there any information about events leading up to the attack so with so little data, it's impossible to formulate any plan based on such evidence.
People should be licensed, not the dog. Licensing, training for both owner and dog as well as any breeder who should be carrying out a decent vetting scheme.
Lastly, I think you're confused between the concept of being 'defensive' and 'offensive'.
I will in future only provide 'copy and paste jobs' when asked specifically for a 'copy and paste job'.
There you go, thats my 'defensive' part of this post.
Heres the 'offensive' part.
Are you perchance a 5'2 Rottweiller owner? Can you spell Napolean?
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
#84
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Just for interest's sake heres a copy and paste job from http://www.dogexpert.com/Dog%20Bite%...tatistics.html
Facts & Stats about Dog Bites & Dog Aggression
There are approximately 4.5 million reported dog bites annually in the United States (nearly 2% of the American population). The majority of dog bites are never reported to local authorities.
40% of American dog owners acquired pets primarily for protection-including German shepherds, Rottweilers, mastiffs and Doberman pinschers. (Source: New York Times, 2/26/01)
Nationwide, U.S. Postal Service carriers suffered 3,423 dog attacks and bites in 2003.
According to the American Medical Association, dog bites are the second leading cause of childhood injury, surpassing playground accidents.
Dog bites to people of the male gender are approximately two times greater than the incidence involving females.
Dogs that are licensed with an identifiable owner are implicated in the vast majority of dog bites (compared with strays).
Dogs not known to the victim account for approximately 10 - 20% of all reported dog bites.
Dog between one and five years are involved in more dog bite incidences than dogs older than 6 years. Male dogs are more frequently involved when compared with female dogs.
Mixed breeds and not pure bred dogs are the type of dog most often involved in inflicting bites to people. The pure-bred dogs most often involved are German shepherds and Chow chows.
The list of breeds most involved in both bite injuries and fatalities changes from year to year and from one area of the country to another, depending on the popularity of the breed.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention document that a chained dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than an unchained dog. Click here for a news story about a mauling of a 4 year old child by a chained pit bull
Canines not spayed or neutered are three times more likely to bite than sterilized ones.
Of the estimated 4.7 million people who were bitten by dogs in 1994, 800,000 sought medical care. Of these, 332,000 needed treatment in emergency rooms, and 6,000 were hospitalized. The average hospital stay for a dog-bite injury was 3.6 days.
Emergency room costs for dog bite victims in the United States was about $102 million in 1994, and overall direct medical costs was about $165 million.
The majority of dog bites to adult humans are inflicted to the lower extremities followed by bites to the upper extremities including the head, face and neck. For children, 77% of dog bite injuries are to facial areas.
According to the Insurance Information Institute, dog bites accounted for about one-quarter of all claims on homeowner's insurance, costing more than $321 million in 2003. In 2002, the latest year for which numbers are available, the average claim for a dog bite was $16,600.
Dog attacks account for one-third of all liability claims on homeowners' insurance policies. According to the Western Insurance Information Service, the insurance industry paid out more than $1 billion in dog-bite claims in 1998 alone.
From 1979 to 1996, dog attacks resulted in more than 300 human dog bite related deaths in the United States. Most of the victims were children.
Approximately 20 people die every year as a result of a dog attack in the United States. By far, the majority of the victims are children.
In the two year period from 1997 to 1998, twenty-seven people died as a result of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997, and 9 in 1998).
Annually in the United States there are approximately 20 human fatalities directly resulting from a dog attack; this number is miniscule compared with human fatalities caused by gunshot (approximately 12,000 annually), accidents (approximately 100,000 annually) or health related disease processes (click here for table) (Click here for commentary on this subject)
The breeds most often involved in fatal attacks are Rottweilers and Pit bulls.
In the United States, pit bulls make up one to three per cent of the overall dog population and cause more than 50 per cent of serious attacks.
Of the 27 people who died as a result of dog bite attacks in 1997 and 1998, 67% involved unrestrained dogs on the owner's property; 19% involved unrestrained dogs off the owner's property; 11% involved restrained dogs on the owner's property; and 4% involved a restrained dog off the owner's property.
Of the 27 people who died as a result of dog bite attacks during 1997 and 1998, 67% involved an attack by one dog; 19% involved an attack by two dogs; and 15% involved an attack by 3 or more dogs.
From 1979 to 1998, at least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in bite related deaths. Pit Bulls and Rottweilers were involved in more than 50 percent of these incidences.
In a study reported by a retired professor from California State University at Chino, Robert Plum, it was found that one dog in 55 will bite someone seriously during the course of a year. With respect to breed differences in the tendency to inflict serious injury, Plumb estimates that when a pit bull bites a human, one in 16 (e.g. 1/16) will inflict serious injury; this contrasts with a ratio of 1/296 Dobermans, and 1/156 German shepherds.
Facts & Stats about Dog Bites & Dog Aggression
There are approximately 4.5 million reported dog bites annually in the United States (nearly 2% of the American population). The majority of dog bites are never reported to local authorities.
40% of American dog owners acquired pets primarily for protection-including German shepherds, Rottweilers, mastiffs and Doberman pinschers. (Source: New York Times, 2/26/01)
Nationwide, U.S. Postal Service carriers suffered 3,423 dog attacks and bites in 2003.
According to the American Medical Association, dog bites are the second leading cause of childhood injury, surpassing playground accidents.
Dog bites to people of the male gender are approximately two times greater than the incidence involving females.
Dogs that are licensed with an identifiable owner are implicated in the vast majority of dog bites (compared with strays).
Dogs not known to the victim account for approximately 10 - 20% of all reported dog bites.
Dog between one and five years are involved in more dog bite incidences than dogs older than 6 years. Male dogs are more frequently involved when compared with female dogs.
Mixed breeds and not pure bred dogs are the type of dog most often involved in inflicting bites to people. The pure-bred dogs most often involved are German shepherds and Chow chows.
The list of breeds most involved in both bite injuries and fatalities changes from year to year and from one area of the country to another, depending on the popularity of the breed.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention document that a chained dog is 2.8 times more likely to bite than an unchained dog. Click here for a news story about a mauling of a 4 year old child by a chained pit bull
Canines not spayed or neutered are three times more likely to bite than sterilized ones.
Of the estimated 4.7 million people who were bitten by dogs in 1994, 800,000 sought medical care. Of these, 332,000 needed treatment in emergency rooms, and 6,000 were hospitalized. The average hospital stay for a dog-bite injury was 3.6 days.
Emergency room costs for dog bite victims in the United States was about $102 million in 1994, and overall direct medical costs was about $165 million.
The majority of dog bites to adult humans are inflicted to the lower extremities followed by bites to the upper extremities including the head, face and neck. For children, 77% of dog bite injuries are to facial areas.
According to the Insurance Information Institute, dog bites accounted for about one-quarter of all claims on homeowner's insurance, costing more than $321 million in 2003. In 2002, the latest year for which numbers are available, the average claim for a dog bite was $16,600.
Dog attacks account for one-third of all liability claims on homeowners' insurance policies. According to the Western Insurance Information Service, the insurance industry paid out more than $1 billion in dog-bite claims in 1998 alone.
From 1979 to 1996, dog attacks resulted in more than 300 human dog bite related deaths in the United States. Most of the victims were children.
Approximately 20 people die every year as a result of a dog attack in the United States. By far, the majority of the victims are children.
In the two year period from 1997 to 1998, twenty-seven people died as a result of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997, and 9 in 1998).
Annually in the United States there are approximately 20 human fatalities directly resulting from a dog attack; this number is miniscule compared with human fatalities caused by gunshot (approximately 12,000 annually), accidents (approximately 100,000 annually) or health related disease processes (click here for table) (Click here for commentary on this subject)
The breeds most often involved in fatal attacks are Rottweilers and Pit bulls.
In the United States, pit bulls make up one to three per cent of the overall dog population and cause more than 50 per cent of serious attacks.
Of the 27 people who died as a result of dog bite attacks in 1997 and 1998, 67% involved unrestrained dogs on the owner's property; 19% involved unrestrained dogs off the owner's property; 11% involved restrained dogs on the owner's property; and 4% involved a restrained dog off the owner's property.
Of the 27 people who died as a result of dog bite attacks during 1997 and 1998, 67% involved an attack by one dog; 19% involved an attack by two dogs; and 15% involved an attack by 3 or more dogs.
From 1979 to 1998, at least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in bite related deaths. Pit Bulls and Rottweilers were involved in more than 50 percent of these incidences.
In a study reported by a retired professor from California State University at Chino, Robert Plum, it was found that one dog in 55 will bite someone seriously during the course of a year. With respect to breed differences in the tendency to inflict serious injury, Plumb estimates that when a pit bull bites a human, one in 16 (e.g. 1/16) will inflict serious injury; this contrasts with a ratio of 1/296 Dobermans, and 1/156 German shepherds.
#87
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: www.tiovicente.com
Posts: 2,006
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Norman D. Landing
I apologise for attempting to provide the information that you asked to be provided with.
I will in future only provide 'copy and paste jobs' when asked specifically for a 'copy and paste job'.
There you go, thats my 'defensive' part of this post.
Heres the 'offensive' part.
Are you perchance a 5'2 Rottweiller owner? Can you spell Napolean?
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
I will in future only provide 'copy and paste jobs' when asked specifically for a 'copy and paste job'.
There you go, thats my 'defensive' part of this post.
Heres the 'offensive' part.
Are you perchance a 5'2 Rottweiller owner? Can you spell Napolean?
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
No, I'm 1.91m and I don't own a Rottweiler. I can spell Napoleon, clearly you can't.
![Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)](images/smilies/rolleyes.gif)
#88
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Horrible twist to this story.
Girl's grandfather and his girlfriend attacked. One dead. Stabbing I think. Unrelated incident. What a bloody mess
Girl's grandfather and his girlfriend attacked. One dead. Stabbing I think. Unrelated incident. What a bloody mess
![Mad](images/smilies/mad.gif)
Last edited by David Lock; 25 September 2006 at 05:32 PM.
#90
![Default](images/icons/icon1.gif)
Originally Posted by Flatcapdriver
I didn't ask to be provided with any evidence about dog attacks.
I'd tend to trust the dogs less the further up in the table. But now you're going to say 'Environmental...........population........etc' again. I'm not professing to be an expert in the field or to suggest that I know how to create a utopian dog owning society. I merely provided some info in a public forum.
However, it's been fun distraction from work.
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)