But they're usually so well behaved.....
03 January 2008, 12:04 PM
#121
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are both lovely
I don't know why you seem to be having a go at me - I love dogs and have learnt quite a lot in the 50 years that I have been around them.
The only disagreement we have is that you seem to be so sure that your Boxer would never harm your child that you would leave them alone together. I think that is too risky and that an adult should be around.
But it's your dog and your child. dl
03 January 2008, 12:10 PM
#122
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many more children will be injured or killed by rottweilers before the breed is banned?
Woman on the TV the other day had two rottweilers and one was destroyed after it attacked her daughter and badly injuring her hand, all she could say was "he was such a gentle dog, never went for anyone"
they all say that until they attack
Woman on the TV the other day had two rottweilers and one was destroyed after it attacked her daughter and badly injuring her hand, all she could say was "he was such a gentle dog, never went for anyone"
they all say that until they attack
03 January 2008, 12:53 PM
#123
Scooby Regular
1) Listen to spoon, he's more knowledgeable about dogs than most people on here.
2) Don't listen to Snug - he's not.
3) There is little media mileage in reporting attacks, even serious ones, by labs, collies, cross breeds, etc. But when Rottweilers are involved, its like a media feeding frenzy.
4) The PDF posted earlier is based upon American/Canadian statistics. It is a matter of fact that a higher percentage of Americans keep certain breeds of dogs for guarding and personal protection than in many other parts of the world including the UK. Under those circumstances you will of course experience a much higher number of dog attacks by those breeds. The stats are therefore seriously skewed and should not be taken as gospel.
5) Of course bigger, stronger dogs will do more damage than smaller weaker ones. Much the same as a bigger stronger human can inflict more damage than a smaller weaker one. Its obvious.
6) Serious attacks on humans by other humans so far outweigh attacks by dogs as to render the number of dog attacks almost insignificant, but again, one Rottwieler attack gets the front page, but serious assualts are so common they don't even make the news these days. It doesn't excuse attacks by dogs, but lets get things in perspective here.
7) I would NEVER leave my dogs unattended with children. Its just common sense.
8) If I had children (and I would include a 16 year old minding a 7 year old and a 1 year old as a child for this purpose) I would never leave them unattended with a dog.
Its just common sense, and its sadly lacking in much of today's society.
03 January 2008, 01:10 PM
#124
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok lets make this real simple for the simpletons posting on this thread.
If you dont like big dogs dont have one. Cross the road when you see one coming.Dont let your children near one.
If they were that bad would they be involved in patient therapy?
Incidentally i think the stats show more people have been killed or badly injured in scooby incidents than any dog attack but no one seems to be demanding a similar ban on these killer cars.
It really depresses me when ignorance and assumption are subsituted for fact in an attempt to justify any kind of predjudice against anything on this site be it dogs cats evos or any deviation from the posters ideal utopia.
richie-the skinheaded, tattooed, 2 rottie owning, multiple earing wearing stereotype.
ps the only dog that has ever come close to killing me was a jack russel-one bite and ascending lymphitis<sp> i'd have far more trust in my rotties than i would in my old jack russel in spite of the fact that the rottie could do more damage with a single bite.
If you dont like big dogs dont have one. Cross the road when you see one coming.Dont let your children near one.
If they were that bad would they be involved in patient therapy?
Incidentally i think the stats show more people have been killed or badly injured in scooby incidents than any dog attack but no one seems to be demanding a similar ban on these killer cars.
It really depresses me when ignorance and assumption are subsituted for fact in an attempt to justify any kind of predjudice against anything on this site be it dogs cats evos or any deviation from the posters ideal utopia.
richie-the skinheaded, tattooed, 2 rottie owning, multiple earing wearing stereotype.
ps the only dog that has ever come close to killing me was a jack russel-one bite and ascending lymphitis<sp> i'd have far more trust in my rotties than i would in my old jack russel in spite of the fact that the rottie could do more damage with a single bite.
03 January 2008, 01:36 PM
#126
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its ok i'm an ex prop -AH maybe I can see your point
but more seriously
For a dog lover its similar to the trust you'd put in a best mate-but agreed a certain degree of care is called for prob in both cases-especially if said mate is a male slapper
richie
03 January 2008, 01:39 PM
#127
Scooby Regular
Animals exhibit far less irrational behavior than humans, and it is therefore easier to anticipate what they will do, provided you understand that behavior.
Ban Rotties, and the undesirable/trophy/stupid owners will moe to something else. Ban that, and they will move on to something else.
The issue here isn't specific breeds of dogs per se, its the various elements of society who keep them for the wrong reasons.
We need to address the cause, not the symptom.
03 January 2008, 01:46 PM
#129
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO DevilDog makes some eminently sensible points.
And certainly Rotties have got themselves a bad press largely, but not entirely, down to the Redtops wanting a meaty "story". But the first post was about a woman minding her own business in her garden when she was attacked out of the blue (what's the dog psychology behind that??). Sure the "owner" was at fault but one has to question whether there should be some kind of control even if it was just for these dogs to be kept on a leash in public places. But I expect that is unworkable and won't stop some stupid 14 year old introducing the family yard dog to an innocent 3-year old who promply spooks it by poking it in the eye. dl
And certainly Rotties have got themselves a bad press largely, but not entirely, down to the Redtops wanting a meaty "story". But the first post was about a woman minding her own business in her garden when she was attacked out of the blue (what's the dog psychology behind that??). Sure the "owner" was at fault but one has to question whether there should be some kind of control even if it was just for these dogs to be kept on a leash in public places. But I expect that is unworkable and won't stop some stupid 14 year old introducing the family yard dog to an innocent 3-year old who promply spooks it by poking it in the eye. dl
03 January 2008, 02:13 PM
#131
Scooby Regular
But the first post was about a woman minding her own business in her garden when she was attacked out of the blue (what's the dog psychology behind that??). Sure the "owner" was at fault but one has to question whether there should be some kind of control even if it was just for these dogs to be kept on a leash in public places.
Its not entirely relevant to this discussion, but have the dogs been confirmed as Rottweilers? The orginal reports I saw just said "believed to be" and one was "Rottwieler type dogs"
I would argue that all dogs should be on a leash in public places (with the exception of council provided, designated and fenced, dog exercise areas) for many reasons.
I would also like to see proper licensing for dog ownership with mandatory basic training and an aptitude test required for ownership of those breeds which require more proactive owners. That should reduce the number of incidents and remove the stereotyping (and I should know about that as I meet many of the criteria
)3rd party insurance should also be mandatory imho. No insurance, no licence. No licence, big fine. Don't pay, 5 years in jail.
But realistically that's not going to happen. The UK can't police licencing and insurance in its driving population, so I don't know how it would cope with dogs.
03 January 2008, 02:28 PM
#132
Scooby Regular
And talking about the media.....
Pulled this from the Sun's website
Its an archive photograph they use from time to time - NOT any of the dogs in question.
But yet, this is a Rottweiler too
Somehow I doubt the second picture would portray the breed in the "right" light for the tabloid journalists.
And for the record, when my two play together, they look pretty much like the top picture (as do pretty much any breed)
Its called "being a dog"
Pulled this from the Sun's website
Its an archive photograph they use from time to time - NOT any of the dogs in question.
But yet, this is a Rottweiler too
Somehow I doubt the second picture would portray the breed in the "right" light for the tabloid journalists.
And for the record, when my two play together, they look pretty much like the top picture (as do pretty much any breed)
Its called "being a dog"
03 January 2008, 02:47 PM
#134
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: RIP - Tam the bam & Andy the Jock
Posts: 14,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 January 2008, 02:49 PM
#135
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 January 2008, 03:23 PM
#137
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Nobbering about...
Posts: 16,067
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been away for a bit with the holiday's and all, but would like to add a few points to this thread as an owner of two Rotties.
1) Listen to spoon, he's more knowledgeable about dogs than most people on here.
2) Don't listen to Snug - he's not.
3) There is little media mileage in reporting attacks, even serious ones, by labs, collies, cross breeds, etc. But when Rottweilers are involved, its like a media feeding frenzy.
4) The PDF posted earlier is based upon American/Canadian statistics. It is a matter of fact that a higher percentage of Americans keep certain breeds of dogs for guarding and personal protection than in many other parts of the world including the UK. Under those circumstances you will of course experience a much higher number of dog attacks by those breeds. The stats are therefore seriously skewed and should not be taken as gospel.
5) Of course bigger, stronger dogs will do more damage than smaller weaker ones. Much the same as a bigger stronger human can inflict more damage than a smaller weaker one. Its obvious.
6) Serious attacks on humans by other humans so far outweigh attacks by dogs as to render the number of dog attacks almost insignificant, but again, one Rottwieler attack gets the front page, but serious assualts are so common they don't even make the news these days. It doesn't excuse attacks by dogs, but lets get things in perspective here.
7) I would NEVER leave my dogs unattended with children. Its just common sense.
8) If I had children (and I would include a 16 year old minding a 7 year old and a 1 year old as a child for this purpose) I would never leave them unattended with a dog.
Its just common sense, and its sadly lacking in much of today's society.
1) Listen to spoon, he's more knowledgeable about dogs than most people on here.
2) Don't listen to Snug - he's not.
3) There is little media mileage in reporting attacks, even serious ones, by labs, collies, cross breeds, etc. But when Rottweilers are involved, its like a media feeding frenzy.
4) The PDF posted earlier is based upon American/Canadian statistics. It is a matter of fact that a higher percentage of Americans keep certain breeds of dogs for guarding and personal protection than in many other parts of the world including the UK. Under those circumstances you will of course experience a much higher number of dog attacks by those breeds. The stats are therefore seriously skewed and should not be taken as gospel.
5) Of course bigger, stronger dogs will do more damage than smaller weaker ones. Much the same as a bigger stronger human can inflict more damage than a smaller weaker one. Its obvious.
6) Serious attacks on humans by other humans so far outweigh attacks by dogs as to render the number of dog attacks almost insignificant, but again, one Rottwieler attack gets the front page, but serious assualts are so common they don't even make the news these days. It doesn't excuse attacks by dogs, but lets get things in perspective here.
7) I would NEVER leave my dogs unattended with children. Its just common sense.
8) If I had children (and I would include a 16 year old minding a 7 year old and a 1 year old as a child for this purpose) I would never leave them unattended with a dog.
Its just common sense, and its sadly lacking in much of today's society.
I never have and never will leave any of my dogs alone with a child because my common sense says not to!
DD, your dogs are soooo beautiful, next time I'm up your way I'm definitely coming to see them
Not you, just the dogs
03 January 2008, 04:28 PM
#138
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there is a reason why Rottweiler attacks are always in the paper, they are always attacking people
Or do you truely believe the savage attacks by Labradors are being swept under the table while the rottweiler is being victimised by the press?
03 January 2008, 06:24 PM
#139
Scooby Regular
No, they don't. Only the newsworthy ones get reported.
No, they are not "always attacking people". In 2006 of all pedigree dogs in the UK, Rottweilers were the 11th most popular with over 6,500 puppies registered. And that doesn't incude all of the unregistered dogs bred that year.
There are probably anything up to 40,000 Rottweilers in the UK and even allowing for unreported "attacks", the numbers of Rottweilers involved in such incidents in the UK is so small as to be statistically insignificant. I fully accept that there is nothing insignificant for those involved, but the fact remains that you are significantly more likely to die in a car crash or as a result of an alcohol related incident than be "attacked" by a Rottweiler.
Taking my point above a bit further, you don't see the press calling for a ban on alcohol do you? I'm not saying anyone is sweeping labrador attacks under the table, but the simple fact remains that incidents involving certain breeds are more widely and dramatically portrayed than others.
Take the baby that died for instance - at the time when no information was available to the newsdesks other than the very basics, it could have been factually reported that "left in the charge of a 7 year old, a one year old baby was involved in an incident by a Rottweiler dog and later died in hospital of injuries sustained"
But no, what we got (on the BBC no less) was " baby attacked and killed by 7to 10 stone Rottweiler" and "Rottweiler savages 1 year old baby"
Why? Because its pure sensationalism. Its what the UK media at all levels has become.
Now, believe me, if the baby had been "savaged" by any dog, regardless of size, it would not have been alive to make it to the hospital. We don't even know the extent of the injuries or the cause of death. For all we know it may have been entirely due to the dog, but it could equally have been because the baby fell and hit its head on the ground.
Another thing, is that its hardly likely that a 2.5 year old Rottie bitch was anywhere near "10 stone", but reporting a "10 stone killer Rottweiler" sounds more dramatic, doesn't it?
The dog was destroyed as it was "clearly a danger to others". Whilst that was probably the best thing to do, although in the absence of any follow up info its hard to be sure.
Having said that, my dogs would go ape**** if a load of suited and booted police, some with guns, were surrounding them with intent. Quite understandable, to be fair. That would constitute a massive threat to a dog.
Interesting also that the "10 stone killer rottweiler" did not (unless i've missed something) injure in any way shape or form the 7 year old that was with the baby. But then, that gets missed out from the "news" report as well. It was dangerous enough to be shot by the police yet it didn't touch the 7 year old that was with the baby it was "attacking" ? Something doesn't add up.
As I've said above, certain breeds are more favoured by certain sections of society. As a result those dogs are more likely to be involved in incidents - not through any fault of the breed, but simply down to the way in which they are brought up.
there is a reason why Rottweiler attacks are always in the paper, they are always attacking people
There are probably anything up to 40,000 Rottweilers in the UK and even allowing for unreported "attacks", the numbers of Rottweilers involved in such incidents in the UK is so small as to be statistically insignificant. I fully accept that there is nothing insignificant for those involved, but the fact remains that you are significantly more likely to die in a car crash or as a result of an alcohol related incident than be "attacked" by a Rottweiler.
Or do you truely believe the savage attacks by Labradors are being swept under the table while the rottweiler is being victimised by the press?
Take the baby that died for instance - at the time when no information was available to the newsdesks other than the very basics, it could have been factually reported that "left in the charge of a 7 year old, a one year old baby was involved in an incident by a Rottweiler dog and later died in hospital of injuries sustained"
But no, what we got (on the BBC no less) was " baby attacked and killed by 7to 10 stone Rottweiler" and "Rottweiler savages 1 year old baby"
Why? Because its pure sensationalism. Its what the UK media at all levels has become.
Now, believe me, if the baby had been "savaged" by any dog, regardless of size, it would not have been alive to make it to the hospital. We don't even know the extent of the injuries or the cause of death. For all we know it may have been entirely due to the dog, but it could equally have been because the baby fell and hit its head on the ground.
Another thing, is that its hardly likely that a 2.5 year old Rottie bitch was anywhere near "10 stone", but reporting a "10 stone killer Rottweiler" sounds more dramatic, doesn't it?
The dog was destroyed as it was "clearly a danger to others". Whilst that was probably the best thing to do, although in the absence of any follow up info its hard to be sure.
Having said that, my dogs would go ape**** if a load of suited and booted police, some with guns, were surrounding them with intent. Quite understandable, to be fair. That would constitute a massive threat to a dog.
Interesting also that the "10 stone killer rottweiler" did not (unless i've missed something) injure in any way shape or form the 7 year old that was with the baby. But then, that gets missed out from the "news" report as well. It was dangerous enough to be shot by the police yet it didn't touch the 7 year old that was with the baby it was "attacking" ? Something doesn't add up.
As I've said above, certain breeds are more favoured by certain sections of society. As a result those dogs are more likely to be involved in incidents - not through any fault of the breed, but simply down to the way in which they are brought up.
03 January 2008, 06:28 PM
#140
Scooby Regular
Understandable
, I'll let them know
03 January 2008, 06:34 PM
#141
Dog attacks get reported regardless.
there is a reason why Rottweiler attacks are always in the paper, they are always attacking people
Or do you truely believe the savage attacks by Labradors are being swept under the table while the rottweiler is being victimised by the press?
there is a reason why Rottweiler attacks are always in the paper, they are always attacking people
Or do you truely believe the savage attacks by Labradors are being swept under the table while the rottweiler is being victimised by the press?
Punish the Deed, not the Breed!
03 January 2008, 07:32 PM
#142
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guns kill more people than Rottweilers too
03 January 2008, 07:50 PM
#143
Scooby Regular
My comparison was equally valid in the context of your statement that Rotties are "always attacking people" which was quite incorrect. I was simply using it to demonstrate the absurdity of your contention
03 January 2008, 07:50 PM
#144
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
of the first 20 I looked at, 19 were overseas (mainly USA) and you wouldnt expect a UK national newspaper of limited editorial content to report on foreign dog attacks?
The one attack that happened here (Wales) was reported in several newspapers although not the Sun
03 January 2008, 07:56 PM
#145
labrador attacks:
December 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Lab%201207.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...mix%201207.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dor%201207.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...mix%201207.pdf
November 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Mix%201107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Mix%201107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...otslab1007.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...alpacs1007.pdf
september 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...pt/lab0907.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...orhood0907.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dog%200907.pdf
august 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...bBoxer0807.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...o%20report.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...st/Lab0801.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...pherds0807.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...llsdog0801.pdf
july 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...fficer0607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ice%200607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ardmix0607.pdf
june 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...sowner0607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...7/Labs0607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Articles/OtherBreedBites/2007/June2007/bullmastiffmixhuskymix-misid'das%20pit%20bull%200607.pdf
may 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art.../gsdlabmix.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ocolab0507.pdf
April 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...GSDLAB0407.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dbreed0407.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...fLabra0407.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...brador0407.pdf
March 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ch/Lab0307.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...brador0307.pdf
February 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ry/Lab0207.pdf
January 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...%20Lab0107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...lowlab0107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Labmix0107.pdf
December 2006:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dordec2006.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...attack2006.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...labmix1206.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...attack1206.pdf
whats that? at least one attack every month by a labrador last year?
December 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Lab%201207.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...mix%201207.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dor%201207.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...mix%201207.pdf
November 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Mix%201107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Mix%201107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...otslab1007.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...alpacs1007.pdf
september 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...pt/lab0907.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...orhood0907.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dog%200907.pdf
august 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...bBoxer0807.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...o%20report.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...st/Lab0801.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...pherds0807.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...llsdog0801.pdf
july 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...fficer0607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ice%200607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ardmix0607.pdf
june 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...sowner0607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...7/Labs0607.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Articles/OtherBreedBites/2007/June2007/bullmastiffmixhuskymix-misid'das%20pit%20bull%200607.pdf
may 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art.../gsdlabmix.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ocolab0507.pdf
April 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...GSDLAB0407.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dbreed0407.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...fLabra0407.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...brador0407.pdf
March 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ch/Lab0307.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...brador0307.pdf
February 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ry/Lab0207.pdf
January 2007:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...%20Lab0107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...lowlab0107.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...Labmix0107.pdf
December 2006:
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...dordec2006.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...attack2006.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...labmix1206.pdf
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...attack1206.pdf
whats that? at least one attack every month by a labrador last year?
03 January 2008, 08:22 PM
#146
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 3,447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of those reports was even an attack on a cat, to my knowledge almost all breeds will attack cats! That website you sourced the information is biased and serves no other purpose but to deflect attention away from a known dangerous breed.
This is an argument no one is going to win, you are obviously very passionate about the breed, and from what I can tell the rottweiller owners here are responsible owner which is a good thing.
Good evening
03 January 2008, 08:45 PM
#147
In order to quantify your statement could you also provide me with the total number labradors owned so we can work out a percentage of attacks per dogs owned. Also the total number Rotty attacks worldwide and as a percentage of total number of that breed owned?
One of those reports was even an attack on a cat, to my knowledge almost all breeds will attack cats! That website you sourced the information is biased and serves no other purpose but to deflect attention away from a known dangerous breed.
This is an argument no one is going to win, you are obviously very passionate about the breed, and from what I can tell the rottweiller owners here are responsible owner which is a good thing.
Good evening
One of those reports was even an attack on a cat, to my knowledge almost all breeds will attack cats! That website you sourced the information is biased and serves no other purpose but to deflect attention away from a known dangerous breed.
This is an argument no one is going to win, you are obviously very passionate about the breed, and from what I can tell the rottweiller owners here are responsible owner which is a good thing.
Good evening
Now't to do with actually being Rottys !
03 January 2008, 11:18 PM
#149
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Weston Super Mare, Somerset.
Posts: 14,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"He came back later and said the dog had nipped him on the thumb so we put some antiseptic on it."
Pretty vicious eh?
dl
Pretty vicious eh?
dl
03 January 2008, 11:46 PM
#150
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I have ad blocked my rep - so dont waste your time!
Posts: 1,548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
do what? I have only posted twice - once to highlight that i now select family pets that are less likely/able to harm children...as i have some. And then to highlight that dogs bred to fight are more able (in every sense) to do harm than those that aren't.
Which post do you have an issue with? I have lived with more bull breeds than (i expect) anyone on here and have won obedience awards/CC's extra with many of them - and i know that their physical abilities and state of mind when confronted by a threat/pain/danger means they are of greater danger to people than other breeds of dog - and don't forget that threat/pain/danger can come in many forms....as i highlighted with my example of my dog being hurt very badly (and accidentally) by my child recently. The dog bit and ran (causing a scratch) I know full well many of my bull terriers would have done a lot more damage in the circumstances (which justifies my choice not to keep them as pets)
not sure what the point of dog/kid pictures is - i have loads.....and i'm sure many yanks have pics of their kids with their gun collection - the point, in relation to this issue, is what?