Interesting article on aggressive dog breeds
- Thread starter mantine
- Start date
Totally agree. Saying that any breed is more prone to aggression is really just setting them up for BSL. I currently don't own any breeds that are being targeted by BSL, but because I'm a dog owner I feel like any breed ban affects dog owners as a whole.
I believe that any dog with teeth has the ability to bite.
I was attacked by a lab when I was 3 or 4, and needed to have stitches on my lip. My fiance Ian was bit by an APBT a couple of years ago and had to go to Urgent Care for it. Do I think that these breeds are aggressive as a whole? No, not at all. I've personally known people bitten by an array of other breeds including both large and small dogs, and I think it comes down to how the dog was bred/raised/treated. Too many factors for an online survey to put into play.
I believe that any dog with teeth has the ability to bite.
I was attacked by a lab when I was 3 or 4, and needed to have stitches on my lip. My fiance Ian was bit by an APBT a couple of years ago and had to go to Urgent Care for it. Do I think that these breeds are aggressive as a whole? No, not at all. I've personally known people bitten by an array of other breeds including both large and small dogs, and I think it comes down to how the dog was bred/raised/treated. Too many factors for an online survey to put into play.
I can see that point, but I disagree. The problem is that bites by large dogs are disproportionately reported, because, obviously, the dogs being large means its more likely some one was hurt. By showing that large dogs are not more aggressive (especially ones of certain breeds) that can help prevent BSL.
Bluntly, though people have been badly hurt by them, no one worries about being bitten by a Chihuahua. They worry about Rottweilers . . . but by showing Rotties are actually LESS aggressive than Chihuahuas it sort of puts things in perspective.
We also can't deny that some breeds are morely likely to bite. That's why I warn parents of young children who ask me about dogs NOT to get a terrier or a toy dog. They are more likely to bite. That doesn't mean they will, or that breeding and training aren't a huge factor, but they are still more likely to bite.
Bluntly, though people have been badly hurt by them, no one worries about being bitten by a Chihuahua. They worry about Rottweilers . . . but by showing Rotties are actually LESS aggressive than Chihuahuas it sort of puts things in perspective.
We also can't deny that some breeds are morely likely to bite. That's why I warn parents of young children who ask me about dogs NOT to get a terrier or a toy dog. They are more likely to bite. That doesn't mean they will, or that breeding and training aren't a huge factor, but they are still more likely to bite.
I don't believe that, though. I don't think that size makes a dog any more likely to bite or not to bite. I honestly can't see Rylie and Chloe ever biting anyone, else they were seriously and I mean SERIOUSLY provoked. Like if someone bit them, then they would possibly nip at you. I'm planning on having children in the next couple of years, and they will be growing up with my chihuahuas.
Surveys like this aren't ever going to take the spotlight off of large breed "aggressive" dogs, though... because even if an online survey of 5,000 people somehow proves that small breeds are more aggressive, it would still take a pack of aggressive toy breeds to kill someone in most cases. It would only take one larger dog.
In rescue we often tell people that a larger breed may be better for them if they have kids. Its not that the smaller breed may be more likely to bite, but kids are loud (screaming, shreiking, throwing tantrums), fast, swing their arms around, throw stuff, may pull ears, tails, accidently trip and fall on the dog, etc. (because nobody can watch them ALL the time ALL day - bathroom breaks, etc.) and larger breeds tend to be much more tolerant of this than smaller breeds.
Note, more likely to bite does NOT mean your Chis will bite, or any other one in particular. At the risk of getting seriously flamed, I'll give an example. Statistically, black men commit more crimes than white men per their percentage of the population. So, technically, it means black men, generically, are more likely to be criminals than white men. (ducks the flames and hopes not to get banned). HOWEVER, this does NOT mean that any given black man, or even the majority of black men are criminals. (see, can I live now?) Saying Chis, doxies, and small dogs in general are more likely to bite ONLY means that all other factors excluded, if you randomly grab 50 small dogs and 50 large dogs, you are more likely to have a biter in the small dogs group. Actually, its likely you'll have NO biters in either group.
And I disagree . . . because what you hear in BSL is not big dogs do more damage . . . in that case danes, saints, and wolfhounds would top the list, and labs and goldens might be on it. You hear, these breeds are more agressive, they are vicious, they are monsters . . . showing that the BSL breeds are in fact LESS aggressive than animals that almost everyone sees as harmless may very well make people reevaluate their opinions. BSL isn't rational (that's why I'm hoping the Vick dogs will prove to be the salvation of their breed) because if it was, it wouldn't exist (it doesn't work and the ratio of non-biters to biters is so small as make it a total waste of resources). But if we can get people to get a step back from thier fears, it might cease to happen. And imagine soemone trying to ban Chis . . . really, all the dog purse girls screaming about Fi-fi and Cuddles . . . there's no WAY that's going to happen.
And I disagree . . . because what you hear in BSL is not big dogs do more damage . . . in that case danes, saints, and wolfhounds would top the list, and labs and goldens might be on it. You hear, these breeds are more agressive, they are vicious, they are monsters . . . showing that the BSL breeds are in fact LESS aggressive than animals that almost everyone sees as harmless may very well make people reevaluate their opinions. BSL isn't rational (that's why I'm hoping the Vick dogs will prove to be the salvation of their breed) because if it was, it wouldn't exist (it doesn't work and the ratio of non-biters to biters is so small as make it a total waste of resources). But if we can get people to get a step back from thier fears, it might cease to happen. And imagine soemone trying to ban Chis . . . really, all the dog purse girls screaming about Fi-fi and Cuddles . . . there's no WAY that's going to happen.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,254
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 36
I understand that it is probably offensive to the Chihuahua/Dachshund/JRT owners who are reading that their breeds are known to be aggressive, but I think you who are offended are entirely missing the point.
No one is saying you own an aggressive dog. No one says Bob is going to attack someone due to this survey. The point is is that for once, a pit bull is not being targetted as a dangerous breed. And finally, the dog that is most likely to bite at you is being shown as not the usual breeds targetted. And I am 90% sure that even if this survey was sent to every person in the US, your Chihuahua/Dachshund/JRT will not get banned. Fortunately, you're dog is not 'scary' looking enough to be banned.
Plus, too many Hollywood Stars would be upset. <-Joke!
No one is saying you own an aggressive dog. No one says Bob is going to attack someone due to this survey. The point is is that for once, a pit bull is not being targetted as a dangerous breed. And finally, the dog that is most likely to bite at you is being shown as not the usual breeds targetted. And I am 90% sure that even if this survey was sent to every person in the US, your Chihuahua/Dachshund/JRT will not get banned. Fortunately, you're dog is not 'scary' looking enough to be banned.
Plus, too many Hollywood Stars would be upset. <-Joke!
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,254
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 36
It's also silly that people read that Pit Bulls are horrid dogs and believe it. Though I won't say this is probably an extremely accurate survey, I don't see it as being false or unfactual. All I see is the hurt now being felt from people who aren't usually targetted for having an aggressive breed. And sorry, but the banning of Chihuahua's because of a survey isn't likely, lol.
Which makes it okay, how? I feel like we're all dog owners and no breed should be singled out. I don't think that ANY breed is horrid, and I've "felt the hurt" from BSL because I care about all dogs. I just happen to have small dogs right now.
I never said that chihuahuas were going to be banned. There were other breeds on that list as well that weren't small breeds. I was just saying that it's silly for people to think that an online survey with only 6,000 people was accurate. I did research studies at my college(studies only about students who go to my particular college) with close to the amount of participants as that. A survey lumping the world of dogs together with only a pool of 6,000 participants is flawed in so many ways.
I never said that chihuahuas were going to be banned. There were other breeds on that list as well that weren't small breeds. I was just saying that it's silly for people to think that an online survey with only 6,000 people was accurate. I did research studies at my college(studies only about students who go to my particular college) with close to the amount of participants as that. A survey lumping the world of dogs together with only a pool of 6,000 participants is flawed in so many ways.
i don't see bsl laws working on the principle of subtraction, they work on the principle of addition. and whether a study like this illustrates that it's not just pits that bite, it gets lost in the point that other breeds can be deemed aggressive, and therefore included in such laws. you won't see it as, since harmless doxies are aggressive, let's not have bsl laws. it doesn't work that way. the facts are dogs are not as dangerous as the media makes them out to be and studies like this are the fodder the media needs to make the sensational point supporting bsl laws. as a dog lover picking on any breed of dog is wrong. we shun such acts in the civilized human society, we should shun such acts in the civilized dog community.
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,254
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 36
I'm not sure there is much we can do to get breeds off breed bans. And I never said this survey would, I don't think that was even the purpose of this. I really don't see this is breed bashing. If it was said that Dachie/Chi/JTR's are horrid aggressive people killing animals that should never be owned, well it would be a different story. To think that anyone person who is for breed bans would read this, take it seriously enough to even consider banning a small breed dog like those would be a huge shock to me. Simply stating that it's not only big dogs that bite, isn't breed bashing- it's reality. It's the same thing as someone commenting "I was bit by a lab". That is not bashing a Labrador. That is not saying, all Labs are mean. It's saying that a Labrador CAN bite. Dachshunds, BITE! Ahh!
I doubt anyone reading that little servey will decide against getting a small breed dog, and decide pit bulls are no longer mean. If I read that corgi's were listed as aggressive, I wouldn't return Regis and never look at a Corgi again. The point of this wasn't to deam specific dogs mean, it was to show that the regularly bashed breeds aren't the only dogs who bite. It's not a personal attack, it's not saying those dogs are not ownable, it's saying little dogs bite too. So no, I don't see this as breed bashing, and I don't see this as asking for a new breed ban because it just won't happen.
But clearly, agree to disagree
I doubt anyone reading that little servey will decide against getting a small breed dog, and decide pit bulls are no longer mean. If I read that corgi's were listed as aggressive, I wouldn't return Regis and never look at a Corgi again. The point of this wasn't to deam specific dogs mean, it was to show that the regularly bashed breeds aren't the only dogs who bite. It's not a personal attack, it's not saying those dogs are not ownable, it's saying little dogs bite too. So no, I don't see this as breed bashing, and I don't see this as asking for a new breed ban because it just won't happen.
But clearly, agree to disagree
There's also the fact that it rings true. Not absolutely true, but in my lifetime I have heard of far more little dog bites than big dog bites happening to real people (as opposed to being in the press). Although the two dogs that have connected with me were larger, I've been SNAPPED at by more small dogs. This doesn't mean small dogs are bad, or vicious. It DOES mean that the perception that they are "harmless" is false.
I would never recommend that someone get rid of their Chi or their terrier when they had a baby, unless the circumstances were unusual somehow. I would not discourage someone from getting one of those breeds (or any other) if it was "their" breed. But when people at the office go . . . we're thinking about getting a dog and we think Jack Russels are cute (to pick at random) what do you think, my response, coming from experience, is "I don't think that's the best breed for a family with small children, in fact I'd recommend something larger." And I grew up with terriers of various breeds, which never bit me. But there is little doubt in my mind (BEFORE reading the survey) that there are better breeds for a household with small children, and those breeders are generally larger, not terriers, and known for their patence and reluctance to resort to their teeth. Which doesn't mean they'll never bite. All dogs can and will bite under the right circumstances, and the vast majority of dogs of any breed will never bite, despite being perfectly able to.
As for whether BSL is additive or subtractive has a lot to do with the motives behind it. If its being pushed by PETA, its additive. If its being pushed by panicked soccer moms it can go either way. It is actually in retreat in some areas as it becomes obvious that it is useless.
I would never recommend that someone get rid of their Chi or their terrier when they had a baby, unless the circumstances were unusual somehow. I would not discourage someone from getting one of those breeds (or any other) if it was "their" breed. But when people at the office go . . . we're thinking about getting a dog and we think Jack Russels are cute (to pick at random) what do you think, my response, coming from experience, is "I don't think that's the best breed for a family with small children, in fact I'd recommend something larger." And I grew up with terriers of various breeds, which never bit me. But there is little doubt in my mind (BEFORE reading the survey) that there are better breeds for a household with small children, and those breeders are generally larger, not terriers, and known for their patence and reluctance to resort to their teeth. Which doesn't mean they'll never bite. All dogs can and will bite under the right circumstances, and the vast majority of dogs of any breed will never bite, despite being perfectly able to.
As for whether BSL is additive or subtractive has a lot to do with the motives behind it. If its being pushed by PETA, its additive. If its being pushed by panicked soccer moms it can go either way. It is actually in retreat in some areas as it becomes obvious that it is useless.
do we really need a study like this to learn that small dogs bite? i would think their sharp teeth and lack of opposable thumbs would be enough. maybe if we studied common sense we wouldn't need the wasted effort on this revelation.
as dog lovers, if our position is reactive, like trying to figure out which dogs bite, it's probably too late for common sense, we've already lost. i would rather see studies on how we can educate dog owners on learning about dog care, and i'm sure we are on agreement with that.
as dog lovers, if our position is reactive, like trying to figure out which dogs bite, it's probably too late for common sense, we've already lost. i would rather see studies on how we can educate dog owners on learning about dog care, and i'm sure we are on agreement with that.
I am not offended that my breed is on the list, as a matter of fact I hope anyone reading this tells everyone interested in a jrt, that there IS a certain amount of aggression in Jrts/Prts and that they are first and foremost hunting dogs. Then many people would stop trying to make them into cute little lap dogs. Considering how many of my breed ends up in rescue or pts because of UNEDUCATED people. And stupid breeders/pet stores/mills that sell to those uneducated people and tell them what they want to hear about the breed instead of the truth.
So please spread the word and possibly save a jrts life.
Btw, none of my dogs have ever bit anyone and I agree that there are too many jrts out there that are yappy, bitting, snarky little sh*ts that make the rest of us look bad.
So please spread the word and possibly save a jrts life.
Btw, none of my dogs have ever bit anyone
and I agree that there are too many jrts out there that are yappy, bitting, snarky little sh*ts that make the rest of us look bad.