Rottweilers

It's absolutely not true that all pets will turn on you ffs!

And if eg a poodle or a terrier gives you a nip when you are grooming it, it's not going to clamp its jaws on you with the a force which is scarcely believable.

The Irish are ahead of us in this respect - Rotties are controlled there, must be muzzled and on a lead in public, see the section in this Irish vet's website, 2nd item from the bottom: http://www.westgatevets.com/index.php?f=data_clinic&a=2

<< The Control of Dogs Act 1986 lists 9 breeds of dog. These are:

· American Pit Bull Terrier
· Bull Mastiff
· Doberman Pinscher
· German Shepard (Alsatian)
· Japanese Akita
· Japanese Tosa
· Rhodesian Ridgeback
· Rottweiler
· Staffordshire Terrier
* And any cross breed of the above

It states that when in a public place, these dogs must:

· Wear a muzzle at all times
· Be on a lead of 2m or less
· Be controlled by a competent person over 16 years of age

Owners of dogs on this list who fail to comply may be fined, imprisoned or
have their dog impounded and euthanased.

There is much debate regarding which breeds should be on the list. Many
owners may feel their dogs are being singled out because of their breed even
though they may trust their own dogs 100%. However, the dogs on this list
are on it for a reason. A Pit Bull, for example can clamp down causing 500
pounds per square inch of jaw pressure (enough to snap bones). It is true
that any dog that is not trained and controlled correctly can be aggressive
but the larger breeds will cause much more damage if they bite. >>

You can imagine how much greater is the force in a Rottie's jaw than a pit bull's.
 
I agree with most of your points HS but I do not agree with the assertion that rottweilers have to be trained not to be aggressive.

If they are brought up as puppies as pets they need be no more dangerous than a german shepherd (another dog who is renowned as a vicious guard dog which conversely can also be kept as a pet, even around children) if handled and trained properly from a young age and not trained to be aggressive. It is true that they may always possess the potential to harm, in which case you don't keep them with kids and you exercise responsibility in caring for them and making sure they are not put in such a situation which could provoke anything. If an animal shows vicious tendencies it should be destroyed; I have alway owned my dogs with the understanding that if one bit someone I would have it put to sleep. In actual fact, much as I love them, I've known far more german shepherds that were dangerously aggressive than rottweilers.

The key with dogs (indeed all animals) is not to show any fear. If you are firm, show no signs of hesitation or doubt, and display "leader of the pack" signs they will not touch you nine times out of ten. I fully realise there is the odd one case in ten which doesn't work out that way - usually with a dog who is trained to attack and be a thug.

Dogs display a strong pack mentality and if they think for a second that you can be cowed by them they will always take advantage of that, whether it manifests itself in the form of attack, being naughty, unruly or destrying things needlessly. That in itself is the main reason why children, more particularly small children, should never be left alone with dogs. Any dog can turn - in actual fact I'd make a pretty damn good guess that more kids are bitten by terriers and jack russells than these so-called dangerous breeds.

OB, I too agree with Headstrong in disagreeing with you. All pets will not turn on you! Maybe with such a viewpoint and lack of understanding of them you should rethink keeping any animals at all?
 
It was around 3pm on Christmas day 1995 when a rottweiler attacked one my pet sheep, taking a chunk out of her chest. This dog escaped from its "compound" adjoining a house across the road, broke into the sheep area and attacked. One of my daughters phoned a farmer down the road who had a gun and liked shooting sheep-worriers but unfortunately he was away for the day visiting family. The wretched owner eventually managed to get the dog off, twittering about how it was such a gentle animal and how he couldn't understand what had got into it, while the rest of his family stood around looking stupid.

It was touch and go for poor Mandy for several days, but she eventually pulled through. Not one of the most enjoyable Christmas days. The dog was destroyed.
 
It's all down to PR.
Compare ferrets to squirrels, I've been bitten by both, & the cuddly little squirrel was by far the worst. Mind you he was delicious when deep fried the next day, something I don't think I would like to do with a ferret!
 
Tigers are big strong cats which is why they are favoured by thugs who want to train them to be vicious. That said, I love the breed and will probably have one of my own one day, along with a lion, another breed I love. They don't all have to be vicious brutes, it is nearly always solely the owner's fault for them being that way in the first place.

I too love animals and prefer big dogs to small ones, indeed our first dog was a german shepherd dominated crossbreed. My eldest was one when we got the dog so both my boys grew from babes with him. One thing I always knew was that if the dog attacked one of them a swift punch or well placed kick from me would stop him and my wife could stop by himusing any number of items around. Our dog scared our postman silly but the only biteing incident was of the boy bites dog variety and the dog just got up and walked away.
However I once tried to prevent a bull mastiff from ripping apart a neighbour's small dog and failed even though I had a heavy spade which I wielded with all my might.As a result I am firmly of the opinion that larger animals that are capable of killing or severely injuring a child or adult and cannot be easily stopped should not be kept as a pet. Not only is the owners family at risk but others and that is unacceptable.My insertion of the big cats in the text of your argument is just to demonstrate how poor the argument is. not personal.
Am pissed as i post now but written before
 
Originally posted by walsworth@Jan 1 2008, 04:02 AM
It's all down to PR.
Compare ferrets to squirrels, I've been bitten by both, & the cuddly little squirrel was by far the worst. Mind you he was delicious when deep fried the next day, something I don't think I would like to do with a ferret!
Click to expand...
I hope it was the vermin grey and not the officially protected red Walworth.
 
:eek: Looking at the teletext for this region I see a kennel in Llanelli have taken in 5 of these pets? and refused another 9 since this sad episode, people obviously trying to get rid of them............ :suspect:
 


Pitbulls and Rottweilers can be lovely dogs -
Click to expand...


stalin hitler and pol pot liked children lovely people

dogs like dobermans and pit bulls are aggressive and are normally owned by aggressive people true there may be one or two exceptions but the lesser of the two evils would be to put them all down even if one or two "innocent" pit bulls persished

it amazes me that some people spend more time on dog welfare than human welfare
 
The point is, PR, why blame the animals for something which is entirely down to sheer stupidity of the humans involved? Would you blame the driver of a car who mowed down a one year old baby who was playing in the fast lane of the motoroway?

No, dobermans, pit bulls, rottweilers are not ALL aggressive, as I have said until I am blue in the face, it tends to be the owners that make them thugs rather than being born automatic killing machines.

As for the sanctimonious comment about people spending more time on dog welfare than human welfare - this wouldn't be an issue in the first place if the humans involved had used half a brain cell when allegedly caring for and looking after their children. Yet no-one has questioned the parents suitability to be having children in the first place.
 
sl

i can actually agree with a lot of what you say in your reply

unfortuantly and it may be a case of saving people from their own stupidity

i can still see destroying these dogs as the only solution

that is unless you can find a way of checking which parents are suitable to have children and which are not

and who is and who isnt suitable to own dogs

and of course in both cases preventing the unsuitable ones from becoming parents/dog owners
 
I know, clearly there is no way to check suitability of parents and/or dog owners, more's the pity!!! :D

It just seems unfair and ridiculous to me to persecute/exterminate entire breeds mainly due to the increasing stupidity of so many people in the human race. That's tantamount to playing God, isn't it?!
 
Back
Top