The 14 most dangerous breeds?
- Thread starter tony_hk
- Start date
truth personally after seeing that list i feel much safer. ive been lucky to meet almot all those breeds (ive never met a tosa or a tibetan mastifs) the bullies ive met are downright clowns, ive never met one with a mean to humans bone in its body...any bully breed thats human agressive is simply the product of bad breeding and bad ownership!
and mastifs, you know how sweet they are? a neo masitif (the one with all the wrinklies) is more likely to slober you to death than maul you.
mastifs are a dog that was bred as a guardian, sure they can be agressive to humans, thats there JOB, they were bred to protect their home, family and the likes its only when those their protecting abuse this purpose that the dogs can become dangerous.
as for the LGB's those ive met have not been human agressiv, infact most working LGB's are not even interested in a human unless one comes threatening its flock....
those kept primarily as pets seem to be a little more independant and dont seem to realy care whether your there or not, but certaintly never agressive.
wanna know which dogs ive had issues with
Labradors (all badly bred with no or limited training)
Cockers (all badly bred with no or limited training)
Chihuahuas (all badly bred and not allowed to be dogs)
Notice a trend here?
Human agression in terms of stuff like this is 100% human fault.
ive only ever been bitten by a Lab...and they are supposed to be one of the best "family" dogs.
and mastifs, you know how sweet they are? a neo masitif (the one with all the wrinklies) is more likely to slober you to death than maul you.
mastifs are a dog that was bred as a guardian, sure they can be agressive to humans, thats there JOB, they were bred to protect their home, family and the likes its only when those their protecting abuse this purpose that the dogs can become dangerous.
as for the LGB's those ive met have not been human agressiv, infact most working LGB's are not even interested in a human unless one comes threatening its flock....
those kept primarily as pets seem to be a little more independant and dont seem to realy care whether your there or not, but certaintly never agressive.
wanna know which dogs ive had issues with
Labradors (all badly bred with no or limited training)
Cockers (all badly bred with no or limited training)
Chihuahuas (all badly bred and not allowed to be dogs)
Notice a trend here?
Human agression in terms of stuff like this is 100% human fault.
ive only ever been bitten by a Lab...and they are supposed to be one of the best "family" dogs.
Tony
A You have used my (C) of my dog I will ask moderators to remove it as well as my post.
B The dog pictured is far from dangerous.
He is the FIRST Therapy dog and CGC of the breed.
He is also reading with rover dog with disabled kids
C No breed is dangerous just people who dont know or cant read dogs and post infor that is WRONG.
D Central Asian Sheperds are NOT on any of the BREED A lists in Europe of in the USA.. Thus based on bite stats alone they have NOT earned a "dangerous dog label " yet
A You have used my (C) of my dog I will ask moderators to remove it as well as my post.
B The dog pictured is far from dangerous.
He is the FIRST Therapy dog and CGC of the breed.
He is also reading with rover dog with disabled kids
C No breed is dangerous just people who dont know or cant read dogs and post infor that is WRONG.
D Central Asian Sheperds are NOT on any of the BREED A lists in Europe of in the USA.. Thus based on bite stats alone they have NOT earned a "dangerous dog label " yet
Foxy great post sadly these days most people learn about breed from net sites with inaccurate information and rarely EVER meet the breeds in person.
The jump to conclusions and post more wrong info.
Kinda like the camp song in which you say one thing when it gets around the camp fire it is NO longer any where near the original content.
The jump to conclusions and post more wrong info.
Kinda like the camp song in which you say one thing when it gets around the camp fire it is NO longer any where near the original content.
I think people sometimes forget that dogs are animals. I really do. All animals, in order to survive in nature have a flight distance that they keep between them and something that is unfamiliar or novel to them. It varies depending on a lot of factors. Dogs can be 1) curious about something which is harmless that they never saw before and will decrease the distance. And they can be 2) afraid of something and increase the distance between them and the unfamiliar thing. The later is the stronger of the two. If they made too many mistakes about the thing they were curious about and it is not harmless, but dangerous, they would not reproduce, could not pass on the genes to be curious because they'd be dead or injured. So, the stronger propensity is to keep distance between them and the unfamiliar. The thing that they're curious about is not necessary to survive. They haven't seen it so far in their life so it is not necessary...only a curiosity. When something is scary, the necessity to increase distance is very strong.
In other words, it's all about socialization. There is a window of time during puppyhood where their curiosity and willingness to adapt to novel things is strong. When that window closes at somewhere before 5 months, getting habituated to new things is extremely difficult. If they haven't seen something before, they will tend to want to keep distance between them and the novel thing. If they are cornered, and can't flee, they'll fight.
Some breeds are more difficult to socialize and it takes more management to compensate. They have been bred to be more aloof with novel things than some other breeds.
Biting is normal behavior for dogs to settle disputes and such. There aren't two kinds of dogs; dogs that don't bite (good dogs) and dogs that do bite (bad dogs) or dangerous dogs....They all can be dangerous. They all can bite. They're animals. That's how they work out their issues. We use lawyers and police and law makers. Dogs use their teeth and growls and other displays of intention to bite. Growling and biting is normal behavior in dogs. As predators, the distance between them and their prey must be reduced.
If animals did not have this flight distance mechanism, they could not survive. Fear of novel things, increasing flight distance is the default setting for all animals, including humans. For a dog to become habituated to the novel things in a human's world, it must be done artificially by humans. Pressure is put on the dogs to adapt to our human world. This comes by way of early socialization and training. And continued socialization.
There are two choices with regard to reaction to dangerous/scary novel things; fight or flight. With artificial selective breeding, some dogs have had the aloofness to novel things extenuated. And the flight part of fight and flight reduced.
Anyhow, as it was said, habituation and compensation for more aloof dogs, dogs that have a stronger propensity to either increase distance or fight has to be managed differently than dogs that are more easily adaptable to novel things.
Bottom line and part of why I wrote all that stuff: I really think that often, people forget dogs are animals and think something is abnormal or wrong with dogs that bite, that they are "bad" dogs. Then they get executed for being what they are and what humans have neglected to do with them in order to make them fit into a human world.
In other words, it's all about socialization. There is a window of time during puppyhood where their curiosity and willingness to adapt to novel things is strong. When that window closes at somewhere before 5 months, getting habituated to new things is extremely difficult. If they haven't seen something before, they will tend to want to keep distance between them and the novel thing. If they are cornered, and can't flee, they'll fight.
Some breeds are more difficult to socialize and it takes more management to compensate. They have been bred to be more aloof with novel things than some other breeds.
Biting is normal behavior for dogs to settle disputes and such. There aren't two kinds of dogs; dogs that don't bite (good dogs) and dogs that do bite (bad dogs) or dangerous dogs....They all can be dangerous. They all can bite. They're animals. That's how they work out their issues. We use lawyers and police and law makers. Dogs use their teeth and growls and other displays of intention to bite. Growling and biting is normal behavior in dogs. As predators, the distance between them and their prey must be reduced.
If animals did not have this flight distance mechanism, they could not survive. Fear of novel things, increasing flight distance is the default setting for all animals, including humans. For a dog to become habituated to the novel things in a human's world, it must be done artificially by humans. Pressure is put on the dogs to adapt to our human world. This comes by way of early socialization and training. And continued socialization.
There are two choices with regard to reaction to dangerous/scary novel things; fight or flight. With artificial selective breeding, some dogs have had the aloofness to novel things extenuated. And the flight part of fight and flight reduced.
Anyhow, as it was said, habituation and compensation for more aloof dogs, dogs that have a stronger propensity to either increase distance or fight has to be managed differently than dogs that are more easily adaptable to novel things.
Bottom line and part of why I wrote all that stuff: I really think that often, people forget dogs are animals and think something is abnormal or wrong with dogs that bite, that they are "bad" dogs. Then they get executed for being what they are and what humans have neglected to do with them in order to make them fit into a human world.
If you think really think about it, that statement doesn't make sense at all. Domestic dogs are completely human-created. They were made by humans, for humans. Why would humans deliberate create an animal that was not compatible to human life? 
I think problems arise when people forget that different dogs were created for different purposes. For example, take the mastiffs and livestock guardians. The entire purpose behind their creation was to guard--be it their families or their territory. Now take a working livestock guardian and try to keep it in a crowded aparment complex. Trouble is likely to happen.
Are there dangerous dogs? Absolutely. In any species of animal (humans included), you can often find individuals that are temperamentally more agressive and unstable. But there's no such a thing as a dangerous dog BREED.
I think problems arise when people forget that different dogs were created for different purposes. For example, take the mastiffs and livestock guardians. The entire purpose behind their creation was to guard--be it their families or their territory. Now take a working livestock guardian and try to keep it in a crowded aparment complex. Trouble is likely to happen.
Are there dangerous dogs? Absolutely. In any species of animal (humans included), you can often find individuals that are temperamentally more agressive and unstable. But there's no such a thing as a dangerous dog BREED.
Would love to know where you got this list? please provide link .
It seems they have NO knowledge of dogs what so ever.
Fact Tm and other breed do NOT go "crazy".
TM like CAS are defenders and in general quite easy going and laid back and they " go off " to protect and turn OFF quiicker than most of the breeds NOT on this stupid list..
PS I just got back from the WORLD dog show with over 5000 ented and a Huge NEO speciality and 69 Fila's.
And NOT one breed on this WRONG list was aggressive or dangerous in exteme crowds and with tons of other dogs.
The Top acting aggressive breeds at this show was GSD's, along with Labs and Swissies. Owners allowed them to LUNGE snap and snawl.
They caused allot of noise and lunging NOT the breeds listed.
One fight broke out between 2 Cane Corso males over a bitch in Heat.
The Caucasians and Central Asians were MAULED by people at the show,
Dane's were couch potato's. Am staff had NO issue and tons were there.
Tms were absent, some of the Dogo Argentine were crate aggressive to other dogs but on leash PERFECT.
Tosas were FINE and so were the DDBX over 100 of them and they were FINE in a crowd of 10,000 + .
So you think??? one of these " dangerous " dogs would of lost it with the Extreme heat and pressure applied to them??????
NOPE NOT one listed .
That tells you about the makers of this list?
They need to get OFF the computer and do some in person research!!!
It seems they have NO knowledge of dogs what so ever.
Fact Tm and other breed do NOT go "crazy".
TM like CAS are defenders and in general quite easy going and laid back and they " go off " to protect and turn OFF quiicker than most of the breeds NOT on this stupid list..
PS I just got back from the WORLD dog show with over 5000 ented and a Huge NEO speciality and 69 Fila's.
And NOT one breed on this WRONG list was aggressive or dangerous in exteme crowds and with tons of other dogs.
The Top acting aggressive breeds at this show was GSD's, along with Labs and Swissies. Owners allowed them to LUNGE snap and snawl.
They caused allot of noise and lunging NOT the breeds listed.
One fight broke out between 2 Cane Corso males over a bitch in Heat.
The Caucasians and Central Asians were MAULED by people at the show,
Dane's were couch potato's. Am staff had NO issue and tons were there.
Tms were absent, some of the Dogo Argentine were crate aggressive to other dogs but on leash PERFECT.
Tosas were FINE and so were the DDBX over 100 of them and they were FINE in a crowd of 10,000 + .
So you think??? one of these " dangerous " dogs would of lost it with the Extreme heat and pressure applied to them??????
NOPE NOT one listed .
That tells you about the makers of this list?
They need to get OFF the computer and do some in person research!!!
I think Tony highlighted TRAINING in all this.
Depends what hands they are in really.
Scenario.
2 people buy a dogs. Do NO training, no socialisation.
1 buys a pug, one buys a pit bull.
I know which one I'd rather be left in a room with.
Fact is, that people aren't condemning the dogs by stating that a dog that is bred for PROTECTION or FIGHTING (etc) is more likely to do what is inherintly bred into it.
You aren't shocked when a collie herds??? You don't gufaw when people talk about their labradors retrieving??
Why be shocked when a poorly trained guarding/fighting/protection dog bites?
I think it is fair to say that a poorly trained pit bull IS more dangerous than a poorly trained pug... It's common sense.
It's NOT condemning the breed. Surely if you want a RESPONSIBLE owner for these dogs you MUST take it into consideration.
Depends what hands they are in really.
Scenario.
2 people buy a dogs. Do NO training, no socialisation.
1 buys a pug, one buys a pit bull.
I know which one I'd rather be left in a room with.
Fact is, that people aren't condemning the dogs by stating that a dog that is bred for PROTECTION or FIGHTING (etc) is more likely to do what is inherintly bred into it.
You aren't shocked when a collie herds??? You don't gufaw when people talk about their labradors retrieving??
Why be shocked when a poorly trained guarding/fighting/protection dog bites?
I think it is fair to say that a poorly trained pit bull IS more dangerous than a poorly trained pug... It's common sense.
It's NOT condemning the breed. Surely if you want a RESPONSIBLE owner for these dogs you MUST take it into consideration.
But not all dogs were domesticated to be companions and live alongside us.
Granted - none were bred to hunt us as such, so we should not be seen as quarry - but we are fair game...
Dogs aren't human - they do not differenciate between us and any other species when they're going on instinct.... They don't have a "don't bite the hand that feeds me" gene... unfortunately...
They are domesticated, but that doesn't mean they can't be bad tempered.
And some ARE harder to adapt.
Some do not fit into your average family... I family with 2.4 kids, jobs, no space, no time can't just get ANY breed and make it fit... I think that is a fair statement.
I know a husky would not adapt to MY lifestyle... it wouldn't fit.
Granted - none were bred to hunt us as such, so we should not be seen as quarry - but we are fair game...
Dogs aren't human - they do not differenciate between us and any other species when they're going on instinct.... They don't have a "don't bite the hand that feeds me" gene... unfortunately...
They are domesticated, but that doesn't mean they can't be bad tempered.
And some ARE harder to adapt.
Some do not fit into your average family... I family with 2.4 kids, jobs, no space, no time can't just get ANY breed and make it fit... I think that is a fair statement.
I know a husky would not adapt to MY lifestyle... it wouldn't fit.
Sorry, but some of the dogs on that list are just hilarious. I would have put some of those breeds in the top 14 nicest breeds, LOL!
Once again, I think lists like this are driven by uneducated people who don't truly understand dogs and their thoughts and opinions are driven by media hype and fear. Last time I checked, it wasn't smart to base any decision off of emotion alone!
Once again, I think lists like this are driven by uneducated people who don't truly understand dogs and their thoughts and opinions are driven by media hype and fear. Last time I checked, it wasn't smart to base any decision off of emotion alone!