login
IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS (Page 2)
-
No new posts
|
 2015-11-09 12:23 PM in reply to: nrpoulin |
Coach  9167     Stairway to Seven |  Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGSOriginally posted by nrpoulin Originally posted by TriMyBest Pit bulls aren't any more aggressive than other breeds. It's all about their training. I work in the medical field and last year I treated 12 patients with bog bites, 11 were Pits, and almost all the people mauled (yes multiple bites) knew the dog. This includes children who were frequently around the dog. The other was a German Shepard. I love dogs, and have seen a number of well behaved Pits. Bottom line is I wouldn't let my children around one. I also work in the medical field...ER doc. We see 1-2 dog bites every day in and very few of them are pitbulls. If you work in OR, you're going to see only the worst of the worst |
| 2015-11-09 12:33 PM in reply to: Stuartap |
Extreme Veteran 1234 West Michigan | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by TriMike Since I have never been in one of those homes where a dog attack has occurred nor know of any personally, I am afraid I can't speak authoritatively on the specifics you cite. But as long as we are talking statistics, let's do that. On average about 1000 Americans a day seek medical attention for a dog bit. The severity of that varies widely. In a ten year period from 2005-2014 there were 326 fatalities from dog attacks. So that is roughly 33/year No numbers are readily available that I could find on how many of those were from dogs trained to attack. My guess is more than a few but let's forgo that for a moment. On average 37,000 Americans a year die in an auto accident. That's 101 per DAY. Another 2.35 million are injured or disabled every year from car accidents. As I stated before, I am sure not once was that the fault of the car, but the driver. So if you want to use statistics as an argument for safety, then I assume you don't drive and don't let your friends drive etc. BTW - almost 650 Americans/day over the age of 15 go to an emergency room for an accident that happened in the bathroom. Do with that what you will. I am really not trying to be confrontational, just trying to put this in to perspective. Do family pets bite, absolutely. Do I firmly believe that that the majority of severe dog attacks are from dogs encourage if not trained to fight, absolutely. I can't prove it, but I know a lot of pit bull owners and their dogs, and I am far more afraid of getting hit by a car while riding than getting bit by a dog. Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by nrpoulin Please forgive me but how does that change the position that it's not the dog but the irresponsible owner? I am a dog lover and the people I associate with are as well. Actually let me expand that, RESPONSIBLE dog lovers. There is not a single one of their dogs that I would not trust with even the most obnoxious person, child or adult. Of course I am wary of strange dogs, but not because of the dog, because I don't know the owner. A few months ago my wife and I spent several days volunteering at Best Friends in UT. There was a dog there that was rescued from a trash dumpster. Both ears had been torn off and his skull had been crushed. He was the loser in a dog fight. The scar that ran across his skull will forever be a reminder of what he went through. Two things to note here. 1. He was finishing up his service dog training. Sweetest thing you would ever want to meet. 2. He was a BIG pit bull. I get the bias against pits. I understand people being frustrated at dog that don't behave well in public. But I can say the same thing about cars that race in and out of traffic, run red lights and are intentionally aggressive around runners and cyclists. I'm pretty sure it isn't the car but the a$$hole driving. As was said previously, if a venue allows dogs expect me to be there with Callie. And if your two year old happens to wander up to her without you noticing, don't worry. Callie will just sit and enjoy the attention. Originally posted by TriMyBest Pit bulls aren't any more aggressive than other breeds. It's all about their training. I work in the medical field and last year I treated 12 patients with bog bites, 11 were Pits, and almost all the people mauled (yes multiple bites) knew the dog. This includes children who were frequently around the dog. The other was a German Shepard. I love dogs, and have seen a number of well behaved Pits. Bottom line is I wouldn't let my children around one. So if a kid is around a pit bull for years then one day gets mauled the owner just became irresponsible? I think it's fantastic that people love pit bulls and rottweilers however the data suggests they're among the most likely to turn on people. Even their loving owners who have done nothing abusive to them ever.... I happen to have a friend who bought two rottweiler pups from a "respectable" breeder. He and his wife raised these pups lovingly, never treated them poorly, trained them to heel, basic commands etc. One day when the dogs were three or four his wife was feeding them and dropped something on the floor near one of their dishes and when she moved to grab it one of the dogs tore into her face, opened her up bad requiring several reconstructive surgeries etc. The only thing they were told was it was likely something instinctual kicked in with the dog thinking their food was about to be taken etc... How's this the fault of the owner? What "training" would have prevented this? IF there's a possibility of certain breeds to revert to instincts that cause them to attack AND they're dangerous in size and strength to begin with, how are people wrong to be very leery being around them? It's one thing to have an attachment to an animal, it's another to ignore the statistics and tell people they're wrong for fearing breeds bred for their fighting prowess...
I think you're confusing things. Nobody stated or insinuated in this thread that dog attacks by dangerous breeds were because they were trained to do so. Quite the opposite, several posters have pointed out that dangerous breeds were NOT trained properly which they then felt shifted blame from the animal to the owner. As for your comment that statistics were not readily available, I found this link in under 15 seconds and there were plenty of others I just didn't open them up to read. If you bother to check the link, there are stats given right away. http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics.php As for your comment on zero auto accidents being caused by the car, I'm assuming you don't drive because blown tires, tires that fall off, brakes that go out etc., all have and do cause accidents. It's interesting you try to minimize danger in one category (dangerous dogs) by pointing out the danger being larger in another (car accidents). Using your logic I could say don't wear a bike helmet because playing on electrical lines is MUCH more dangerous. And it's not the fault of electricity, it's the person touching the lines... I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on this either, however I do have to point out BS or twisting of what I've said. |
| 2015-11-09 12:59 PM in reply to: 0 |
| Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by Leegoocrap nm... nobody is going to change anyone's mind in this thread. Why is this even being discussed in Tri Talk? Moderators should have moved it. Edited by ChrisM 2015-11-09 1:00 PM |
| 2015-11-09 1:06 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Every dog breed is different. Some were bred to retrieve, some to point, some to track....and some were bred to guard and protect, some were bred for fun, and some were bred to fight. It's unrealistic to think that you can minimize these traits in a well bred dog. It is, after all, what the breed was developed to do. The problem is, people think that a dog is a dog.....it most certainly is not. Some dog breeds are not "beginner dogs" and should really never be owned by a person who is inexperienced in owning a dog. I can give you a long list of do's and don'ts when it comes to dogs and avoiding problems with them as an owner......but I've owned dozens of dogs in my life and trained dogs for a number of years. The woman who got bit picking up the food.....not surprising, especially with that breed, then again I wouldn't try to with my Lab either. Pitbulls can be an absolute handful for an inexpereinced owner.....but one of the most fiercly loyal and loving companions in an experienced hand. I'm not going to say that some breeds are not more dangerous than others.......sure they can be. But the danger mostly comes, as has been said, when they are paired with poor owners for that breed. That's absolutely fair to say. On the other hand, it's absolutely not fair to just dismiss, out of hand, what inherent traits are in a dog from it's breeding. The fact is, there are dogs bred for guarding, attacking, and fighting.......those are no dogs for an inexperienced hand. You know, there's a reason you don't give your 16 year old the keys to a Ferrari. Edited by Left Brain 2015-11-09 1:13 PM |
| 2015-11-09 1:24 PM in reply to: TriMike |
Extreme Veteran 1190 Silicon Valley | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by TriMike Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by TriMike Since I have never been in one of those homes where a dog attack has occurred nor know of any personally, I am afraid I can't speak authoritatively on the specifics you cite. But as long as we are talking statistics, let's do that. On average about 1000 Americans a day seek medical attention for a dog bit. The severity of that varies widely. In a ten year period from 2005-2014 there were 326 fatalities from dog attacks. So that is roughly 33/year No numbers are readily available that I could find on how many of those were from dogs trained to attack. My guess is more than a few but let's forgo that for a moment. On average 37,000 Americans a year die in an auto accident. That's 101 per DAY. Another 2.35 million are injured or disabled every year from car accidents. As I stated before, I am sure not once was that the fault of the car, but the driver. So if you want to use statistics as an argument for safety, then I assume you don't drive and don't let your friends drive etc. BTW - almost 650 Americans/day over the age of 15 go to an emergency room for an accident that happened in the bathroom. Do with that what you will. I am really not trying to be confrontational, just trying to put this in to perspective. Do family pets bite, absolutely. Do I firmly believe that that the majority of severe dog attacks are from dogs encourage if not trained to fight, absolutely. I can't prove it, but I know a lot of pit bull owners and their dogs, and I am far more afraid of getting hit by a car while riding than getting bit by a dog. Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by nrpoulin Please forgive me but how does that change the position that it's not the dog but the irresponsible owner? I am a dog lover and the people I associate with are as well. Actually let me expand that, RESPONSIBLE dog lovers. There is not a single one of their dogs that I would not trust with even the most obnoxious person, child or adult. Of course I am wary of strange dogs, but not because of the dog, because I don't know the owner. A few months ago my wife and I spent several days volunteering at Best Friends in UT. There was a dog there that was rescued from a trash dumpster. Both ears had been torn off and his skull had been crushed. He was the loser in a dog fight. The scar that ran across his skull will forever be a reminder of what he went through. Two things to note here. 1. He was finishing up his service dog training. Sweetest thing you would ever want to meet. 2. He was a BIG pit bull. I get the bias against pits. I understand people being frustrated at dog that don't behave well in public. But I can say the same thing about cars that race in and out of traffic, run red lights and are intentionally aggressive around runners and cyclists. I'm pretty sure it isn't the car but the a$$hole driving. As was said previously, if a venue allows dogs expect me to be there with Callie. And if your two year old happens to wander up to her without you noticing, don't worry. Callie will just sit and enjoy the attention. Originally posted by TriMyBest Pit bulls aren't any more aggressive than other breeds. It's all about their training. I work in the medical field and last year I treated 12 patients with bog bites, 11 were Pits, and almost all the people mauled (yes multiple bites) knew the dog. This includes children who were frequently around the dog. The other was a German Shepard. I love dogs, and have seen a number of well behaved Pits. Bottom line is I wouldn't let my children around one. So if a kid is around a pit bull for years then one day gets mauled the owner just became irresponsible? I think it's fantastic that people love pit bulls and rottweilers however the data suggests they're among the most likely to turn on people. Even their loving owners who have done nothing abusive to them ever.... I happen to have a friend who bought two rottweiler pups from a "respectable" breeder. He and his wife raised these pups lovingly, never treated them poorly, trained them to heel, basic commands etc. One day when the dogs were three or four his wife was feeding them and dropped something on the floor near one of their dishes and when she moved to grab it one of the dogs tore into her face, opened her up bad requiring several reconstructive surgeries etc. The only thing they were told was it was likely something instinctual kicked in with the dog thinking their food was about to be taken etc... How's this the fault of the owner? What "training" would have prevented this? IF there's a possibility of certain breeds to revert to instincts that cause them to attack AND they're dangerous in size and strength to begin with, how are people wrong to be very leery being around them? It's one thing to have an attachment to an animal, it's another to ignore the statistics and tell people they're wrong for fearing breeds bred for their fighting prowess...
I think you're confusing things. Nobody stated or insinuated in this thread that dog attacks by dangerous breeds were because they were trained to do so. Quite the opposite, several posters have pointed out that dangerous breeds were NOT trained properly which they then felt shifted blame from the animal to the owner. As for your comment that statistics were not readily available, I found this link in under 15 seconds and there were plenty of others I just didn't open them up to read. If you bother to check the link, there are stats given right away. http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics.php As for your comment on zero auto accidents being caused by the car, I'm assuming you don't drive because blown tires, tires that fall off, brakes that go out etc., all have and do cause accidents. It's interesting you try to minimize danger in one category (dangerous dogs) by pointing out the danger being larger in another (car accidents). Using your logic I could say don't wear a bike helmet because playing on electrical lines is MUCH more dangerous. And it's not the fault of electricity, it's the person touching the lines... I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on this either, however I do have to point out BS or twisting of what I've said. Mike I am not trying to twist anything. As I stated, just trying to put things in to perspective. As to the link, I am very familiar with it and yes there are a lot of stats. However, I did not find any that relate to the numbers of those attacks that were directly related to dogs being trained or encouraged to fight. If I missed it I apologize but I did look for far longer than 15 seconds and did not see that issue addressed. Furthermore, I am not dismissing the dog bite stats. In fact, I quoted them from the very site you referenced. With respect to tires blowing, or falling off etc, sometimes those are the fault of a defect. However it is far more likely that it is the neglect of the car owner to not properly service their car. When something happens you (speaking rhetorically not to you specifically) then the incidence of it happening is 100%. Nobody like to get bit by a dog, hit by a car or struck by lightning, which BTW kills more people annually than dog attacks. I am not trying to diminish the risk and have zero problem with anyone taking any precautions they deem appropriate to minimize the risk of any of these or the likely thousands of other negative things that can befall us. The points I am trying to make are two and I think they are fairly simple. 1. IMO, most SERIOUS dog bites can be directly related to poor training or intentional training to be aggressive. 2. On a scale of relative risk, there are far more dangerous things we do willingly on a daily basis that are far more likely to cause us harm. Mike I hope you have a great offseason (I assume it's offseason in MI) and a killer 2016. |
| 2015-11-09 2:24 PM in reply to: Stuartap |
Extreme Veteran 1234 West Michigan | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by TriMike Mike I am not trying to twist anything. As I stated, just trying to put things in to perspective. As to the link, I am very familiar with it and yes there are a lot of stats. However, I did not find any that relate to the numbers of those attacks that were directly related to dogs being trained or encouraged to fight. If I missed it I apologize but I did look for far longer than 15 seconds and did not see that issue addressed. Furthermore, I am not dismissing the dog bite stats. In fact, I quoted them from the very site you referenced. With respect to tires blowing, or falling off etc, sometimes those are the fault of a defect. However it is far more likely that it is the neglect of the car owner to not properly service their car. When something happens you (speaking rhetorically not to you specifically) then the incidence of it happening is 100%. Nobody like to get bit by a dog, hit by a car or struck by lightning, which BTW kills more people annually than dog attacks. I am not trying to diminish the risk and have zero problem with anyone taking any precautions they deem appropriate to minimize the risk of any of these or the likely thousands of other negative things that can befall us. The points I am trying to make are two and I think they are fairly simple. 1. IMO, most SERIOUS dog bites can be directly related to poor training or intentional training to be aggressive. 2. On a scale of relative risk, there are far more dangerous things we do willingly on a daily basis that are far more likely to cause us harm. Mike I hope you have a great offseason (I assume it's offseason in MI) and a killer 2016. Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by TriMike Since I have never been in one of those homes where a dog attack has occurred nor know of any personally, I am afraid I can't speak authoritatively on the specifics you cite. But as long as we are talking statistics, let's do that. On average about 1000 Americans a day seek medical attention for a dog bit. The severity of that varies widely. In a ten year period from 2005-2014 there were 326 fatalities from dog attacks. So that is roughly 33/year No numbers are readily available that I could find on how many of those were from dogs trained to attack. My guess is more than a few but let's forgo that for a moment. On average 37,000 Americans a year die in an auto accident. That's 101 per DAY. Another 2.35 million are injured or disabled every year from car accidents. As I stated before, I am sure not once was that the fault of the car, but the driver. So if you want to use statistics as an argument for safety, then I assume you don't drive and don't let your friends drive etc. BTW - almost 650 Americans/day over the age of 15 go to an emergency room for an accident that happened in the bathroom. Do with that what you will. I am really not trying to be confrontational, just trying to put this in to perspective. Do family pets bite, absolutely. Do I firmly believe that that the majority of severe dog attacks are from dogs encourage if not trained to fight, absolutely. I can't prove it, but I know a lot of pit bull owners and their dogs, and I am far more afraid of getting hit by a car while riding than getting bit by a dog. Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by nrpoulin Please forgive me but how does that change the position that it's not the dog but the irresponsible owner? I am a dog lover and the people I associate with are as well. Actually let me expand that, RESPONSIBLE dog lovers. There is not a single one of their dogs that I would not trust with even the most obnoxious person, child or adult. Of course I am wary of strange dogs, but not because of the dog, because I don't know the owner. A few months ago my wife and I spent several days volunteering at Best Friends in UT. There was a dog there that was rescued from a trash dumpster. Both ears had been torn off and his skull had been crushed. He was the loser in a dog fight. The scar that ran across his skull will forever be a reminder of what he went through. Two things to note here. 1. He was finishing up his service dog training. Sweetest thing you would ever want to meet. 2. He was a BIG pit bull. I get the bias against pits. I understand people being frustrated at dog that don't behave well in public. But I can say the same thing about cars that race in and out of traffic, run red lights and are intentionally aggressive around runners and cyclists. I'm pretty sure it isn't the car but the a$$hole driving. As was said previously, if a venue allows dogs expect me to be there with Callie. And if your two year old happens to wander up to her without you noticing, don't worry. Callie will just sit and enjoy the attention. Originally posted by TriMyBest Pit bulls aren't any more aggressive than other breeds. It's all about their training. I work in the medical field and last year I treated 12 patients with bog bites, 11 were Pits, and almost all the people mauled (yes multiple bites) knew the dog. This includes children who were frequently around the dog. The other was a German Shepard. I love dogs, and have seen a number of well behaved Pits. Bottom line is I wouldn't let my children around one. So if a kid is around a pit bull for years then one day gets mauled the owner just became irresponsible? I think it's fantastic that people love pit bulls and rottweilers however the data suggests they're among the most likely to turn on people. Even their loving owners who have done nothing abusive to them ever.... I happen to have a friend who bought two rottweiler pups from a "respectable" breeder. He and his wife raised these pups lovingly, never treated them poorly, trained them to heel, basic commands etc. One day when the dogs were three or four his wife was feeding them and dropped something on the floor near one of their dishes and when she moved to grab it one of the dogs tore into her face, opened her up bad requiring several reconstructive surgeries etc. The only thing they were told was it was likely something instinctual kicked in with the dog thinking their food was about to be taken etc... How's this the fault of the owner? What "training" would have prevented this? IF there's a possibility of certain breeds to revert to instincts that cause them to attack AND they're dangerous in size and strength to begin with, how are people wrong to be very leery being around them? It's one thing to have an attachment to an animal, it's another to ignore the statistics and tell people they're wrong for fearing breeds bred for their fighting prowess...
I think you're confusing things. Nobody stated or insinuated in this thread that dog attacks by dangerous breeds were because they were trained to do so. Quite the opposite, several posters have pointed out that dangerous breeds were NOT trained properly which they then felt shifted blame from the animal to the owner. As for your comment that statistics were not readily available, I found this link in under 15 seconds and there were plenty of others I just didn't open them up to read. If you bother to check the link, there are stats given right away. http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics.php As for your comment on zero auto accidents being caused by the car, I'm assuming you don't drive because blown tires, tires that fall off, brakes that go out etc., all have and do cause accidents. It's interesting you try to minimize danger in one category (dangerous dogs) by pointing out the danger being larger in another (car accidents). Using your logic I could say don't wear a bike helmet because playing on electrical lines is MUCH more dangerous. And it's not the fault of electricity, it's the person touching the lines... I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on this either, however I do have to point out BS or twisting of what I've said. Stuart, the points I've been trying to make and the stats on the site I posted are all about the breeds themselves, NOT dogs trained TO attack... I think if a dog is trained to attack, as LB said, there wouldn't be much disagreement on which breeds to use... As for the serious dog bites, I say we agree to disagree and that's fine, this is a very difficult topic. My opinion is if certain breeds require a much higher level of diligence in order to make them "safe" for the owners, the public and other animals, that validates the breed is volatile. If one step is missed and the dog tears someone up (my example with the rottweiler attack) are those odds really acceptable to defend the animal and blame the owner? As LB stated, there are a lot of do's and don'ts with certain breeds and many in the public are unable and/or unwilling to do the work and as a result they have very dangerous animals on their hands. As a sidebar, the link I posted delves into dealing with the issue of when it's appropriate to blame the animal vs. the owner which may be of interest to those that are convinced it's always the owner - period. For your second point on more dangerous things that can impact us daily, I agree completely. My perspective has tried to remain strictly on dangerous breed dogs. You have a great 2016 too.
|
| 2015-11-09 2:25 PM in reply to: 0 |
Expert 2852 Pfafftown, NC | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by Left Brain The woman who got bit picking up the food.....not surprising, especially with that breed, then again I wouldn't try to with my Lab either. I'm not going to say that some breeds are not more dangerous than others.......sure they can be. But the danger mostly comes, as has been said, when they are paired with poor owners for that breed. That's absolutely fair to say. I've trained 2 dogs to national awards status (hundreds of hours of training). I am not a professional dog trainer. Full disclosure. The first line I quoted, above, is simply not acceptable (to me) as a trainer or a dog owner. I actually can't comprehend anyone feeling it is (acceptable). Sure....it's fine, if you want to keep your dog away from others. I have friends (sometimes they bring kids) who come over, though. I want my dogs "just" before rolling over on their backs when they see me. You may scoff at the level of submissiveness I'm describing/demanding, but I can take ANYTHING....ANY TIME out of ANY dog I ever owned's mouth. Period. Never even a hint of what happened to the lady above occurring. But, I don't own the breeds people have to worry about. If I did, I wouldn't expect others to worry about whether I trained my dog right or not. So, I'd be respectful enough not to take it around others. Edited by nc452010 2015-11-09 2:39 PM |
| 2015-11-09 3:03 PM in reply to: TriMike |
Extreme Veteran 1190 Silicon Valley | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Mike I think at the end of the day there is much we agree on. There are breeds that are much more difficult than other to handle and many people who do own them, even though well intentioned, are not capable to handle the dogs properly. I guess my experience has been with very capable dog owners who know how to handle the breeds they own. I think where we depart is that I believe it is far more often the 'fault' (if that is even the correct word) of the owner than the dog. Even most of the worst, most violent dogs as deemed by the courts from Michael Vick's dog fighting kennels were successfully rehabilitated and placed in homes without incident. Now I readily admit those families were experienced pit bull owners and the rehabilitation was done by experts. Like I said earlier, if they allow dogs and I am there, expect to see Callie (that is her in my picture) and feel free to walk up and say hello. She is a lover, not a biter. Be well. |
| 2015-11-09 3:49 PM in reply to: Stuartap |
| Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS This tread made me think about the dogs driving the car....then they all bark at the Post truck going by...... Ok back to some real serious talk |
| 2015-11-09 4:38 PM in reply to: nc452010 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by nc452010 Originally posted by Left Brain I've trained 2 dogs to national awards status (hundreds of hours of training). I am not a professional dog trainer. Full disclosure. The first line I quoted, above, is simply not acceptable (to me) as a trainer or a dog owner. I actually can't comprehend anyone feeling it is (acceptable). Sure....it's fine, if you want to keep your dog away from others. I have friends (sometimes they bring kids) who come over, though. I want my dogs "just" before rolling over on their backs when they see me. You may scoff at the level of submissiveness I'm describing/demanding, but I can take ANYTHING....ANY TIME out of ANY dog I ever owned's mouth. Period. Never even a hint of what happened to the lady above occurring. But, I don't own the breeds people have to worry about. If I did, I wouldn't expect others to worry about whether I trained my dog right or not. So, I'd be respectful enough not to take it around others. The woman who got bit picking up the food.....not surprising, especially with that breed, then again I wouldn't try to with my Lab either. I'm not going to say that some breeds are not more dangerous than others.......sure they can be. But the danger mostly comes, as has been said, when they are paired with poor owners for that breed. That's absolutely fair to say. We can argue about what level of submissivness we train our dogs to.....I'll just say that I have to train mine to sit and not do exactly what they are bred to do....retrieve...until I say so.....even if 10 ducks hit the water. I don't want them to get shot. Our experience training dogs is the same, and I have no doubt that many here would consider some of the methods "inhumane",......that's fine. And I can take anything out of my dogs mouth as well....or have her pick up a pile of hammered chit if I tell her to. I still back her away from her food if I need to get near her while she's eating. It's a matter of respect as much as anything. Hell.....try to take a steak off my plate and let me know how that goes for you. I don't expect her to be any different at meal time. |
| 2015-11-09 5:50 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Expert 2852 Pfafftown, NC | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by nc452010 Originally posted by Left Brain I've trained 2 dogs to national awards status (hundreds of hours of training). I am not a professional dog trainer. Full disclosure. The first line I quoted, above, is simply not acceptable (to me) as a trainer or a dog owner. I actually can't comprehend anyone feeling it is (acceptable). Sure....it's fine, if you want to keep your dog away from others. I have friends (sometimes they bring kids) who come over, though. I want my dogs "just" before rolling over on their backs when they see me. You may scoff at the level of submissiveness I'm describing/demanding, but I can take ANYTHING....ANY TIME out of ANY dog I ever owned's mouth. Period. Never even a hint of what happened to the lady above occurring. But, I don't own the breeds people have to worry about. If I did, I wouldn't expect others to worry about whether I trained my dog right or not. So, I'd be respectful enough not to take it around others. The woman who got bit picking up the food.....not surprising, especially with that breed, then again I wouldn't try to with my Lab either. I'm not going to say that some breeds are not more dangerous than others.......sure they can be. But the danger mostly comes, as has been said, when they are paired with poor owners for that breed. That's absolutely fair to say. We can argue about what level of submissivness we train our dogs to.....I'll just say that I have to train mine to sit and not do exactly what they are bred to do....retrieve...until I say so.....even if 10 ducks hit the water. I don't want them to get shot. Our experience training dogs is the same, and I have no doubt that many here would consider some of the methods "inhumane",......that's fine. And I can take anything out of my dogs mouth as well....or have her pick up a pile of hammered chit if I tell her to. I still back her away from her food if I need to get near her while she's eating. It's a matter of respect as much as anything. Hell.....try to take a steak off my plate and let me know how that goes for you. I don't expect her to be any different at meal time. I thought I remembered talking to you about dogs (I've self-trained two MHR's). That's why your comment above surprised me. I don't get the "bad owner" argument (in the context of why dogs shouldn't or should be allowed at public events). It doesn't matter where you want to place the blame on someone getting bitten. In the end, they still were (bitten). Good luck with your dog, LB. I'm out of that game. |
| 2015-11-09 6:32 PM in reply to: nc452010 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by nc452010 Originally posted by Left Brain I thought I remembered talking to you about dogs (I've self-trained two MHR's). That's why your comment above surprised me. I don't get the "bad owner" argument (in the context of why dogs shouldn't or should be allowed at public events). It doesn't matter where you want to place the blame on someone getting bitten. In the end, they still were (bitten). Good luck with your dog, LB. I'm out of that game. Originally posted by nc452010 Originally posted by Left Brain I've trained 2 dogs to national awards status (hundreds of hours of training). I am not a professional dog trainer. Full disclosure. The first line I quoted, above, is simply not acceptable (to me) as a trainer or a dog owner. I actually can't comprehend anyone feeling it is (acceptable). Sure....it's fine, if you want to keep your dog away from others. I have friends (sometimes they bring kids) who come over, though. I want my dogs "just" before rolling over on their backs when they see me. You may scoff at the level of submissiveness I'm describing/demanding, but I can take ANYTHING....ANY TIME out of ANY dog I ever owned's mouth. Period. Never even a hint of what happened to the lady above occurring. But, I don't own the breeds people have to worry about. If I did, I wouldn't expect others to worry about whether I trained my dog right or not. So, I'd be respectful enough not to take it around others. The woman who got bit picking up the food.....not surprising, especially with that breed, then again I wouldn't try to with my Lab either. I'm not going to say that some breeds are not more dangerous than others.......sure they can be. But the danger mostly comes, as has been said, when they are paired with poor owners for that breed. That's absolutely fair to say. We can argue about what level of submissivness we train our dogs to.....I'll just say that I have to train mine to sit and not do exactly what they are bred to do....retrieve...until I say so.....even if 10 ducks hit the water. I don't want them to get shot. Our experience training dogs is the same, and I have no doubt that many here would consider some of the methods "inhumane",......that's fine. And I can take anything out of my dogs mouth as well....or have her pick up a pile of hammered chit if I tell her to. I still back her away from her food if I need to get near her while she's eating. It's a matter of respect as much as anything. Hell.....try to take a steak off my plate and let me know how that goes for you. I don't expect her to be any different at meal time. Oh, I'm out too.....my hound is 10 now. I may get back into it when I retire because I enjoy it.......but for now I'm happy to watch this girl enjoy her days of "retirement" and just spending time with her. I don't get into the "bad owner" stuff either. If you love dogs I'm on your side. BUT, I'll stick to my comment that not all owners are suited to all dogs. Breeding is huge, as you well know......and some dogs are bred to the very high end of their instincts.....they are a handful for someone who doesn't have the experience to understand their nature. I don't pick up my dogs food while she is eating......and I wouldn't do that with any dog. You know the saying.......never get between a dog and it's bone. |
| 2015-11-09 8:09 PM in reply to: Dutchcrush |
Veteran 732 Pittsburgh, PA | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS I can absolutely understand being frustrated by this. If you're allergic, if you're scared, if you just don't like dogs... it's a race expo. I've never in my life seen a dog at one. Race expos are a noisy, crowded, stressful place even without dogs. It's weird to have dog food at an IM expo and even weirder to allow dogs. OP: in the right. |
| 2015-11-10 12:52 AM in reply to: nc452010 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by nc452010 Originally posted by Left Brain The woman who got bit picking up the food.....not surprising, especially with that breed, then again I wouldn't try to with my Lab either. I'm not going to say that some breeds are not more dangerous than others.......sure they can be. But the danger mostly comes, as has been said, when they are paired with poor owners for that breed. That's absolutely fair to say. I've trained 2 dogs to national awards status (hundreds of hours of training). I am not a professional dog trainer. Full disclosure. The first line I quoted, above, is simply not acceptable (to me) as a trainer or a dog owner. I actually can't comprehend anyone feeling it is (acceptable). Sure....it's fine, if you want to keep your dog away from others. I have friends (sometimes they bring kids) who come over, though. I want my dogs "just" before rolling over on their backs when they see me. You may scoff at the level of submissiveness I'm describing/demanding, but I can take ANYTHING....ANY TIME out of ANY dog I ever owned's mouth. Period. Never even a hint of what happened to the lady above occurring. But, I don't own the breeds people have to worry about. If I did, I wouldn't expect others to worry about whether I trained my dog right or not. So, I'd be respectful enough not to take it around others. My brother also trains dogs as a non-pro for retriever field trials. Every night he takes his 5 dogs for a walk around the neighborhood, off leash, he does use an e-collar i(n a responsible way). It's set as light a a tap on the shoulder. My brother is the best dog trainer I have ever met personally. Five dogs under voice control...3 of them are pit bulls, 2 of them are labs. They will all sit on command at 50 feet away (without the collar), come one by one when their name is called, he feeds them by having them all out of the ktichen, puts all their bowls down and calls their name one at a time in a different order. People are shocked when they see how well behaved they are and that he's not a mean dog-beater to get them to behave that way. When they are not being walked or fed, they are being wrestled and snuggled by two pre-teen boys who have had pit bulls and labs since they were 4 or 5. No incidents and these boys are not gentle! He is respectful of others but not by avoiding people, rather by demonstrating that his dogs...of all breeds, are under voice command and are very polite dogs too. In return my brother demands that any strangers approach his dogs respectfully and he won't hesitate to ask certain unpredictable appearing children to be kept away (kids that are not paying attention, are not old enough to know how to approach a strange dog, etc). Somebody here said that no one's mind was going to change...well my mind was changed when my sister-in-law followed through and got their first pit bull. I was skeptical and thought it was a bad decision...now I am absolutely in love with the breed and think they are the greatest dogs. |
| 2015-11-10 5:33 AM in reply to: 0 |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by AdventureBear Somebody here said that no one's mind was going to change...well my mind was changed when my sister-in-law followed through and got their first pit bull. I was skeptical and thought it was a bad decision...now I am absolutely in love with the breed and think they are the greatest dogs. I said that... and your mind has not been changed by this thread. Thereby proving my point  This thread is the tri equivalent of somebody saying "I saw Chrissie Wellington win Kona in a road helmet, that's faster than an aero helmet." Edited by Leegoocrap 2015-11-10 5:36 AM |
| 2015-11-10 6:28 AM in reply to: AdventureBear |
Expert 2852 Pfafftown, NC | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS " In return my brother demands that any strangers approach his dogs respectfully and he won't hesitate to ask certain unpredictable appearing children to be kept away (kids that are not paying attention, are not old enough to know how to approach a strange dog, etc). " How can your brother "demand" this in a crowd of people? Can you not see the rub? I will repeat........I am 100% "for" ALL dogs (that can 100% be trusted....or controlled) being anywhere people are. This is a VERY civil conversation. I've not been offended by anything anyone has said, and hope I've returned that respect. |
| 2015-11-10 8:12 AM in reply to: nc452010 |
Extreme Veteran 1234 West Michigan | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by nc452010 " In return my brother demands that any strangers approach his dogs respectfully and he won't hesitate to ask certain unpredictable appearing children to be kept away (kids that are not paying attention, are not old enough to know how to approach a strange dog, etc). " How can your brother "demand" this in a crowd of people? Can you not see the rub? I will repeat........I am 100% "for" ALL dogs (that can 100% be trusted....or controlled) being anywhere people are. This is a VERY civil conversation. I've not been offended by anything anyone has said, and hope I've returned that respect. I think this is where the disconnect originates. I haven't heard anyone comment that dangerous breeds are incapable of being trained. It sounds as though competent and diligent trainers can get them to do anything. However the point that keeps being missed is when a dangerous breed is in the hands of someone incapable or uninterested in training takes them out in public, lets them run loose etc. As Jeff states, how can a dog owner "demand" strangers act in certain ways if they're in a crowded public space? What happens if the neighbor kid's soccer ball goes over the fence and kids being kids they go for the ball before thinking and the dog sees an intruder? This has been a civilized discussion and I enjoy listening to others' perspectives. I actually think we mainly agree, the main difference is not acknowledging that some breeds are just dangerous and without proper training they can and do hurt people. And when an unfortunate attack happens and it's blamed only the irresponsible owner, not the breed, that's short-sighted in my opinion.
|
| 2015-11-10 11:20 AM in reply to: Dutchcrush |
Member 1083 | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Honestly, it was an outdoor expo in a parking lot. There was no gate or ticket to enter. How would you keep dogs out? I have no bone in this fight (ha!). |
| 2015-11-10 12:41 PM in reply to: TriMike |
Extreme Veteran 1190 Silicon Valley | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by TriMike Originally posted by nc452010 " In return my brother demands that any strangers approach his dogs respectfully and he won't hesitate to ask certain unpredictable appearing children to be kept away (kids that are not paying attention, are not old enough to know how to approach a strange dog, etc). " How can your brother "demand" this in a crowd of people? Can you not see the rub? I will repeat........I am 100% "for" ALL dogs (that can 100% be trusted....or controlled) being anywhere people are. This is a VERY civil conversation. I've not been offended by anything anyone has said, and hope I've returned that respect. I think this is where the disconnect originates. I haven't heard anyone comment that dangerous breeds are incapable of being trained. It sounds as though competent and diligent trainers can get them to do anything. However the point that keeps being missed is when a dangerous breed is in the hands of someone incapable or uninterested in training takes them out in public, lets them run loose etc. As Jeff states, how can a dog owner "demand" strangers act in certain ways if they're in a crowded public space? What happens if the neighbor kid's soccer ball goes over the fence and kids being kids they go for the ball before thinking and the dog sees an intruder? This has been a civilized discussion and I enjoy listening to others' perspectives. I actually think we mainly agree, the main difference is not acknowledging that some breeds are just dangerous and without proper training they can and do hurt people. And when an unfortunate attack happens and it's blamed only the irresponsible owner, not the breed, that's short-sighted in my opinion.
Mike, like you I have enjoyed the conversation and the opportunity to share differing opinions. As well I appreciate the civil and respectful tone from all. I won't speak for anyone else but I certainly agree that dangerous breeds "in the hands of someone incapable or uninterested in training them" are a real threat to the safety and well being of others. The point you are trying to make however "And when an unfortunate attack happens and it's blamed only the irresponsible owner, not the breed, that's short-sighted in my opinion." to quote you, seems inconsistent with your own explanation of the problem. QUOTE - " I haven't heard anyone comment that dangerous breeds are incapable of being trained." We agree. With proper training and handling any breed can be trained. QUOTE - " It sounds as though competent and diligent trainers can get them to do anything." Again we agree. The work done with the Vick dogs is just one example. QUOTE - "I actually think we mainly agree, the main difference is not acknowledging that some breeds are just dangerous and without proper training they can and do hurt people." Again we agree. However, here your specific words "without proper training" seem to speak against the conclusion you draw. As you state and I agree with 100%, dangerous breeds can be trained, diligent trainers can get them to do anything and WITHOUT proper training they can and do hurt people. The common thread in all of these statements you made is the OWNER taking the responsibility to properly train and control their dog. Failure to do that is where we all agree trouble can arise. Failure to do that is not the dogs fault, it's the owners. I would never argue with anyone, there are a lot of irresponsible dog owners out there. Sadly the list of "a lot of irresponsible_____" fill in the blank is very long and not exclusive to dog owners. Thanks again for the perspective. |
| 2015-11-10 1:58 PM in reply to: Stuartap |
Extreme Veteran 1234 West Michigan | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by Stuartap Originally posted by TriMike Mike, like you I have enjoyed the conversation and the opportunity to share differing opinions. As well I appreciate the civil and respectful tone from all. I won't speak for anyone else but I certainly agree that dangerous breeds "in the hands of someone incapable or uninterested in training them" are a real threat to the safety and well being of others. The point you are trying to make however "And when an unfortunate attack happens and it's blamed only the irresponsible owner, not the breed, that's short-sighted in my opinion." to quote you, seems inconsistent with your own explanation of the problem. QUOTE - " I haven't heard anyone comment that dangerous breeds are incapable of being trained." We agree. With proper training and handling any breed can be trained. QUOTE - " It sounds as though competent and diligent trainers can get them to do anything." Again we agree. The work done with the Vick dogs is just one example. QUOTE - "I actually think we mainly agree, the main difference is not acknowledging that some breeds are just dangerous and without despite proper training they can and do hurt people." Again we agree. However, here your specific words "without proper training" seem to speak against the conclusion you draw. As you state and I agree with 100%, dangerous breeds can be trained, diligent trainers can get them to do anything and WITHOUT proper training they can and do hurt people. The common thread in all of these statements you made is the OWNER taking the responsibility to properly train and control their dog. Failure to do that is where we all agree trouble can arise. Failure to do that is not the dogs fault, it's the owners. I would never argue with anyone, there are a lot of irresponsible dog owners out there. Sadly the list of "a lot of irresponsible_____" fill in the blank is very long and not exclusive to dog owners. Thanks again for the perspective. Originally posted by nc452010 " In return my brother demands that any strangers approach his dogs respectfully and he won't hesitate to ask certain unpredictable appearing children to be kept away (kids that are not paying attention, are not old enough to know how to approach a strange dog, etc). " How can your brother "demand" this in a crowd of people? Can you not see the rub? I will repeat........I am 100% "for" ALL dogs (that can 100% be trusted....or controlled) being anywhere people are. This is a VERY civil conversation. I've not been offended by anything anyone has said, and hope I've returned that respect. I think this is where the disconnect originates. I haven't heard anyone comment that dangerous breeds are incapable of being trained. It sounds as though competent and diligent trainers can get them to do anything. However the point that keeps being missed is when a dangerous breed is in the hands of someone incapable or uninterested in training takes them out in public, lets them run loose etc. As Jeff states, how can a dog owner "demand" strangers act in certain ways if they're in a crowded public space? What happens if the neighbor kid's soccer ball goes over the fence and kids being kids they go for the ball before thinking and the dog sees an intruder? This has been a civilized discussion and I enjoy listening to others' perspectives. I actually think we mainly agree, the main difference is not acknowledging that some breeds are just dangerous and without proper training they can and do hurt people. And when an unfortunate attack happens and it's blamed only the irresponsible owner, not the breed, that's short-sighted in my opinion.
Good catch. That was a mistake. To summarize the thousands of words, I believe certain dangerous breeds will always be a danger despite diligent owners. They become exponentially more dangerous in the hands of incompetent owners. New flavor: Require a permit to own a dangerous breed?
|
| 2015-11-10 2:46 PM in reply to: TriMike |
Expert 2852 Pfafftown, NC | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by TriMike New flavor: Require a permit to own a dangerous breed?
I've been saying for years that people should have to post a surety bond to own some breeds. This would not be in lieu of having homeowners' ins. This would be in ADDITION to said. Before anyone scoffs at the idea, I looked it up. Some states (in limited situations) already have this (on some basis). |
| 2015-11-10 2:53 PM in reply to: nc452010 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by nc452010 Originally posted by TriMike New flavor: Require a permit to own a dangerous breed? I've been saying for years that people should have to post a surety bond to own some breeds. This would not be in lieu of having homeowners' ins. This would be in ADDITION to said. Before anyone scoffs at the idea, I looked it up. Some states (in limited situations) already have this (on some basis).
I would be OK with that.
|
| 2015-11-10 4:14 PM in reply to: nc452010 |
Extreme Veteran 1190 Silicon Valley | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by nc452010 Originally posted by TriMike New flavor: Require a permit to own a dangerous breed?
I've been saying for years that people should have to post a surety bond to own some breeds. This would not be in lieu of having homeowners' ins. This would be in ADDITION to said. Before anyone scoffs at the idea, I looked it up. Some states (in limited situations) already have this (on some basis). You wouldn't have to make it in lieu of homeowners insurance, most insurance companies will not insure some breeds. While I don't like it, I understand it and could live with it. My displeasure is based on my belief that good training and handling should not be penalized. Responsible owners are being punished for the behavior of the irresponsible. If you truly believe that some breeds are simply too dangerous irrespective of training and handling, some people will inevitable get to the conclusion that the species should be destroyed. And before anyone scoff at this, I have heard that 'solution' offered on more than one occasion. |
| 2015-11-10 10:22 PM in reply to: nc452010 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by nc452010 " In return my brother demands that any strangers approach his dogs respectfully and he won't hesitate to ask certain unpredictable appearing children to be kept away (kids that are not paying attention, are not old enough to know how to approach a strange dog, etc). " How can your brother "demand" this in a crowd of people? Can you not see the rub? I will repeat........I am 100% "for" ALL dogs (that can 100% be trusted....or controlled) being anywhere people are. This is a VERY civil conversation. I've not been offended by anything anyone has said, and hope I've returned that respect. He doesn't walk 5 dogs off leash in a crowd. But if they are in a park and there is a family or two nearby he doesn't avoid them if there's no obvious chaotic activity going on...and I should clarify that by demand...he doesn't stand there and shout at strangers, rather it's the attitude he commands by being in control of his dogs, and being able to converse with strangers as they approach. There's no rub. Just sharing my observations of how he handles 3 pit bulls in public spaces. |
| 2015-11-11 12:59 PM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
Expert 2547 The Woodlands, TX | Subject: RE: IMFL want to make me scream - NO DOGS Originally posted by Leegoocrap Originally posted by AdventureBear Somebody here said that no one's mind was going to change...well my mind was changed when my sister-in-law followed through and got their first pit bull. I was skeptical and thought it was a bad decision...now I am absolutely in love with the breed and think they are the greatest dogs. I said that... and your mind has not been changed by this thread. Thereby proving my point This thread is the tri equivalent of somebody saying "I saw Chrissie Wellington win Kona in a road helmet, that's faster than an aero helmet."
I agree. Arguing with dog owners about dogs is like arguing with vegans about food. |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK