Dogs that can be dangerous

If you saw the program on dogs with Martin Clunes,one of the comments he made is something that all need to note, and that was "No matter what size or temperament your dog is remember you are living with a wolf" 

I heard of some people who shouldn't have bought a puppy.  Took it from the breeder at 8 weeks old.  2 weeks later it was back because it "chewed stuff",  My daughter was recently asked by a prospective puppy purchaser how long it took to train?  No sale!  It's the ignorant people who wreck dogs.  

Pip, spot on. I had 6 pups a few years ago, 5 of them found homes I chose, from those 5, 4 of them keep contact. I rejected at least 10 potential new homes due to the lack of experience or common sense or not being Dog oriented. I had at least 3 meetings & numerous mails. They're not just Dogs they're family. Your daughter is my kind of Dog owner. You've brought up a gud un

Thanks Rocky - she does work hard at it - last month she had a pup to stay while the new owners went on holiday - and they were worried about the weight of the pup - at 6 months it weighed 19kg - not much for a lab maybe but the mother only weighs 23kg - and the father wasn't big either - but this lady's vet had worried her that it was underweight for its age!  She is a slightly strange shaped pup though having gone from being one of the biggest girl pups - her legs stopped growing!  Bit like a Dexter cow perhaps!  At least the owners love her - and are happy to ask advice.  My daughter would take her back in the blink of an eye if they made the wrong noises too.  I have had to take back one pup I sold some years ago - I had a bad feeling about the home but the woman was insistant she knew what she was doing with GSDs.  The dog lived with me till she was 16.5 years old - not bad for a big breed!  That woman - or more likely her son - turned that dog into a wreck that  was definitely capable of causing damage - but she didn't get the chance once I had her back. 

IMO there are NO naturally bad dogs.  There are however bad owners who. cant be bothered to  teach their dog what is unacceptable and acceptable behavior. . They only have themselves to blame when their dog.bites a person or rips furniture apart.

K

Right Kenine that GSD I took back had destroyed 11 pairs of curtains!  And neither the paperboy or the Postie would deliver to that house unless the dog was inside.  Unfortunately it doesn't help the victims if the owners are at fault.  I do believe there should be some form of protection to the general public from irresponsible owners. 

as most will be aware two people have died this week from injuries sustained by dogs and im sure you will join me in extending condolancies to their families, i have deliberately titled this thread this way because i believe that the dogs are only dangerous if allowed to be sometimes "deliberately" others by pure chance,eg it makes a bid for freedom by chance,never the less any death that could have been prevented is one too many,and before the doggy people attack me, the question (debate) is should the law now be tightened as to what type of dogs people are allowed to keep and penalties for owners of dogs that are not controlled properly as i believe most do

Going back to the OP.  No changes to the law are going to make irresponsible dog owners responsible.   We live in a society that is controlling enough without diminishing freedom even further.   Breed specific legislation has been discredited over the past few years and does nothing to tackle the issue of dangerous dogs.  A Jack Russell or West Highland White Terrier can just as easily become vicious and bite.  Have a look at the figures on which dogs are most likely to bite their owners - they show the Labrador has the worst record.....!.

When I first started rescuing GSDs - my vet said he would rather have a GSD on his table than a Ladrador!  I was quite shocked but now I know what he meant. 

Some weeks go we were on the Clumber Park caravan site, a large area set within a National Trust property. Unfortunately on an otherwise peaceful afternoon we were surrounded by the sound of dogs - what a nuisance to say the least - I don't like dogs at the best of times. Barking dogs, yelping dogs, whining dogs. If I wanted to spend my leisure time in a 'dog kennels' I would. So on a quick count there were eleven dogs in close proximity to us. So on the site there must have been a least a hundred dogs of all types shapes and sizes. Dog nightmare. Strangely far more dogs on site than children - very sad for the future of the Caravan Club.

I understand that dogs are allowed to stay for free - Caravan Club missing a revenue stream here.

Why can't a large site like Clumber Park have a segregated area for dog owners, and leave the rest of us in peace, safety and quiet. 

I noticed one dog owner allow her small dog which was on an extendable lead to wander onto another caravans hardstanding pitch to 'deposit'. The owner then went onto the pitch to 'plastic bag' the contents. How disgusting can you get ?

The reason for my mistrust of dogs - when I was a teenager, a friend of mine went to pet a dog, whilst I stood away. The attack that followed by the dog, which took no more than a minute, left him in hospital for a week to recover all of his wounds. He never went near a dog again.

I agree with the last person comments, there are just too many dogs on site, as they said, there appears more dog than people. perhaps with should rename the club to Caravan and Dog Club as it seems their are as many dogs as vans, I think the club should realise that not everybody likes dogs and should be segregated, its not just the dogs its the stuff they leave behind.