register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
catrinsparkles
Dogsey Veteran
catrinsparkles is offline  
Location: england
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,601
Female 
 
16-01-2014, 09:25 PM

Dog aggression

http://theconversation.com/dog-aggre...e-owners-22015
Reply With Quote
Lacey10
Dogsey Veteran
Lacey10 is offline  
Location: Nr Ireland
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 19,204
Female 
 
16-01-2014, 09:38 PM
Enjoyed reading that Catrin,thankyou
Reply With Quote
mjfromga
Dogsey Veteran
mjfromga is offline  
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,680
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 10:15 AM
Nice article Catrin. Makes a lot of sense and of course is more or less totally agreeable for most dog owners on here.

P.S.

I could have SWORN that first dog was Nigredo when I saw that pic. It looks JUST like him... also it doesn't look aggressive, more like it's lunging for food or something.
Reply With Quote
Lacey10
Dogsey Veteran
Lacey10 is offline  
Location: Nr Ireland
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 19,204
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 10:32 AM
There's a sentence in that report that I 100% truly agree with.Sadly some dog owners don't get it

"Understanding that any dog can potentially be aggressive given the right circumstances is key to reducing injuries"
Reply With Quote
Tang
Dogsey Veteran
Tang is offline  
Location: Pyla Village, Larnaka, Cyprus
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,788
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 11:49 AM
Originally Posted by Lacey10 View Post
There's a sentence in that report that I 100% truly agree with.Sadly some dog owners don't get it

"Understanding that any dog can potentially be aggressive given the right circumstances is key to reducing injuries"
Yes indeed. And I agree with a lot of this ...

But there is one aspect where breed is relevant to the risk of injury from dogs: size and strength. Because while large or powerful dogs don’t display any greater risk of aggression than any other, the potential for serious injury is higher if they do. So should particular, powerful breeds be banned? To answer that, it’s worth considering whether there’s evidence that this approach works, or whether reducing aggression risk in all dogs is a better approach.

Several countries, including the UK, have banned or restricted certain breeds. This had dealt a blow to dog welfare, not least those surreal cases where dogs' lives are determined not by their behaviour but on measurements of leg length or skull width, and the long-term kennelling of dogs during protracted legal proceedings.


Do you see what I see? Dr. Manfred Herrmann Allgemeiner
History seems to show that this approach is not effective at reducing injuries – in fact they are rising, despite these measures. Paradoxically, breed-specific legislation can increase the number of dogs of banned breeds, as the cachet of an outlawed dog appeals to some. Dogs in these environments can indeed become dangerous – because the way they are treated makes aggressive behaviour more likely.

Policy should instead focus on the factors that influence the risk of aggression in the first place. Most people object when governments take the approach of banning things – imagine the cries of “nanny state” if fast cars were banned from the roads on account of their greater likelihood of causing injury than less powerful vehicles if driven irresponsibly. In reality, society takes the approach of reducing the risk posed by all drivers, regardless of what car they drive.

Every new driver is given a thorough education, which is bench-marked by a standard theoretical and practical driving test. We have well-established, and largely accepted, codes of practice that govern drivers' behaviour to reduce accident risk, and laws to enforce them. It would make sense to take the same approach for reducing aggression towards humans in dogs.
All I would add to that is ... thoroughly testing new drivers both practically and theoretically has not resulted in no road traffic accidents has it?

And they didn't mention that the CARS also have to be tested to make sure they are in a safe condition to drive. A car can be a lethal weapon, not just in the 'wrong hands' but also if it is in an unroadworthy state.

I equate car and owner with dog and owner.
Reply With Quote
Lacey10
Dogsey Veteran
Lacey10 is offline  
Location: Nr Ireland
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 19,204
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 12:03 PM
Originally Posted by Tang View Post
Yes indeed. And I agree with a lot of this ...



All I would add to that is ... thoroughly testing new drivers both practically and theoretically has not resulted in no road traffic accidents has it?

And they didn't mention that the CARS also have to be tested to make sure they are in a safe condition to drive. A car can be a lethal weapon, not just in the 'wrong hands' but also if it is in an unroadworthy state.

I equate car and owner with dog and owner.
Never thought of it like that,so true
Reply With Quote
mjfromga
Dogsey Veteran
mjfromga is offline  
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 5,680
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 12:22 PM
Originally Posted by Lacey10 View Post
There's a sentence in that report that I 100% truly agree with.Sadly some dog owners don't get it

"Understanding that any dog can potentially be aggressive given the right circumstances is key to reducing injuries"
Some dog owners (even on this site) SWEAR that isn't true. That is a problem I see. No dog in the world is 100%

I repeat, NO dog in the world is 100%. I really don't care what anybody says. I make this mistake sometimes. I mean I know no dog is 100% but I want to believe it sometimes.

We love our angels and we sometimes think they can do no wrong. But at the end of the day... they are dogs, and we should take care to remember that.

Some people just know that certain dogs will never, ever do anything. Then one day... BOOM, and then you get the... "He has never done that before" and it's always a day too late.

Even if you do have a very balanced dog that is not even remotely aggressive, the mentality that he will never do anything simply should not be adopted. I think it's best that way.

Nigredo is like this... he is not aggressive and the most aggressive thing I've ever seen him do was knock Jade down and pin her there. He didn't even knock her down, she more or less rolled over in submission/fear. She was not hurt and he let her up with a word.

Also, people tend to think that very scared/timid dogs are never dangerous and will always cower from a situation. That is SO false. Like SO, SO false!

A plate crashes to the floor and your dog runs and hides in fear, okay. At the dog park, an overly playful dog scares her and there is no where to run... she attacks the other dog, inflicting injuries.

Owner acts dramatic, not understanding how their timid creature could do such a thing. This kind of thing happens all the time. Fear aggression is actually the worst kind IMO because you often don't see it coming.

I always caution dog owners who have dogs that are scared of everything to take extra care not to put their dogs in situations where it might feel cornered or extremely scared.
Reply With Quote
Florence
Almost a Veteran
Florence is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,223
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 12:35 PM
Good point Tang.
I would add though that society has somehow accepted the fact that cars kill people every year. Nobody goes on about banning cars or certain cars. If somebody gets run over by a car it's a 'casualty' or an accident.
If the driver was at fault or was driving irresponsively, they have their licence taken away and can even face prison time.
A dog is not a car, it's a living being with it's own brain. It reacts to the environment as do humans. It's an animal, so it's normal that it doesn't react as predicvitvely as a car, but for some reason the majority of the society (or the government, who knows) seem to think they do.
So the maintenance work for a dog is a lot more complex than for a car. You can't just bring it to a garage and say: please fix it, I'll pay money.
So we should make education priority and come down harder on puppy farming and back yard breeding (producers of dogs that are more likely to end up 'unroadworthy' quicker).

Err I've kind of lost my point in there somewhere between cars and dogs.

What I'm mainly trying to say is that society is much more enraged if a dog kills a person (because it's not been looked after properly and/or because the owners didn't have enough of an understanding for it) than if a car kills a person (because the driver was driving under the influence, because the car had a fault, because of weather conditions etc.) even though a dog is a living being and not just a machine that doesn't have it's own emotions.

We seem to have accepted the risk that cars pose yet we want there to be no risk at all when it comes to dogs..
Reply With Quote
chlosmum
Almost a Veteran
chlosmum is offline  
Location: Borsod-Abauj-Zemplen Hungary
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,036
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 03:07 PM
A very interesting artricle Catrin and thank you for posting it.

I totally agree that ANY dog, can be potentially aggressive given the right circumtances.

I for example would never leave my 5kg Tibbie, Chloe alone with a small child. She's an extremely friendly and tolerant little dog but I know from experience that small children tend to treat her as though she's a fluffy toy which irritates her and although she's never bitten anyone and I doubt whether she would, she'll show her displeasure by growling and snapping. Obviously being so small she's not capable of inflicting major injury but even so just knowing she MIGHT bite I'm not prepared to take the risk.
Reply With Quote
Tang
Dogsey Veteran
Tang is offline  
Location: Pyla Village, Larnaka, Cyprus
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,788
Female 
 
17-01-2014, 03:13 PM
Florence I don't just 'accept' the risk that cars pose. Not if that car was in a dangerous condition or in the control of someone totally unfit to drive it.

No more than I accept damage inflicted by a dog if the dog was known or could be proved to be 'dangerous' or was in the control (or supposed to be) of someone totally unfit to own it.

Blame is more readily apportioned to dogs. Sadly punishment seems not to be so readily visited upon the owners of those dogs. There lies the difference.

Just putting down a dog that has injured or killed someone does not deal with the underlying problem if the problem is the person who owns the dog.

No more than taking away and crushing a car that killed someone would deal with the problem of the person who was unfit to drive it.

As I am talking about dogs and cars - it seems to me that in the one case the dog is punished and owner gets off lightly. In the other case solely the owner or driver is punished. Ergo it is accepted that the owner or person in CONTROL of the vehicle is entirely responsible but it would seem, not in the case of a dog.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aggression redsky Training 0 11-10-2011 10:15 AM
Aggression John Bull General Dog Chat 54 18-10-2009 11:48 AM
dog to dog aggression kirsty_ Training 14 23-04-2008 08:14 PM
dog aggression kirsty_ Training 3 14-02-2008 08:40 PM
What is this? What can we do? Dog Aggression AliceandDogs Training 3 04-01-2008 09:33 PM

© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top